Reglerentwurf zur Synchronisation einer hybriden Aktuatorkonfiguration

Diplomarbeit

Modeling the Life Cycle Cost of Jet Engine Maintenance

Students Research Project by Ralf Seemann seemann.ra@gmail.com

Hamburg October 2010

Abstract
Cost incurred by aircraft maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) make up a considerable proportion of the total life cycle cost of an aircraft. For an evaluation of the economic efficiency of commercial aircraft, it is therefore crucial to estimate its MRO cost. The largest share of these cost are incurred by the maintenance of the aircraft engines. Engine maintenance is performed on-condition in dedicated workshops mainly independent from the regular maintenance check events of the remainder aircraft. For a consideration of aircraft life cycle cost, it is hence also necessary to predict the intervals of these engine shop visits. The present study discusses an approach for estimating the life cycle cost of aircraft engine maintenance. It provides an extensive review on basic concepts of jet engine MRO as well as on the primary factors that affect the engine maintenance cost and intervals. Based on these resources, a database was assembled from historic maintenance data provided by the aviation magazine “Aircraft Commerce”. Through linear regression analysis of the database, cost estimating relationships (CERs) describing the correspondence between maintenance cost/intervals and basic engine specifications were derived. These CERs are complemented by a series of adjustment factors that were developed in order to reflect additional influential effects, such as operational severity or engine age. The resulting model demonstrates that reasonable figures for the engine shop visit intervals and cost can be estimated by considering the engine take-off thrust, engine dry weight, engine maturity, average flight length, applied derate and environmental conditions as primary influence factors. Since the assembled database contains only maintenance information of the currently mature engine generation, the validity of the developed model is limited to the current engine generation. However, it is assumed that the basic maintenance characteristics remain unchanged with the next engine generation. Plausibility tests, which compare the model results with estimates for the maintenance cost of the next engine generation, indicate that the more advanced engines can be represented by the developed model through the use of technology factors. The developed model is intended to complement the aircraft life cycle cost simulation tool (LCC-tool), which is being developed at the Institute of Air Transportation Systems at Hamburg University of Technology. The LCC-tool uses Matlab as programming environment and enables the evaluation of technologies under the incorporation of expertise in form of technology factors. Therefore, the resulting model was implemented into the structure of the existing Matlab programme sequence.

I

Contents
List of Abbreviations List of Symbols 1 Introduction 1.1 1.2 2 Thesis Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thesis Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V VII 1 2 2 3 3 3 5 11 11 13 19 24 26 27 27 32 32 32 33 35 36 39 40 40 42 43 43 44

Literature Review 2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 Basic Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Turbofan Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On-Wing Engine Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine Overhaul - Shop Visit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine Time On-Wing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine Maintenance Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reflection of EMC in DOC methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parametric Cost Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Aircraft Engine Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3

Development of Cost Estimating Relationships 3.1 Database Assembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4 3.1.5 3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.3 3.3.1 3.3.2 Establishing the Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Review of Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Normalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Candidate Relationship Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Regression Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shop Visit Interval CERs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shop Visit Cost CERs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Results of the Parametric Cost Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

II

Contents

III

4

Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost 4.1 Model Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.3 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.4 4.4.1 4.4.2 CER-Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effect-Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spare Engine Charges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Base Costs and Intervals from CERs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Adjustment of Intervals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Final Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Model Results vs. Original Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Model Results vs. Additional Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of the Plausibility Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensitivity of Model Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sensitivity of Life Cycle SVC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

46 46 48 49 51 52 52 53 55 55 55 58 60 60 61 63 68 68 70 72 72 72 73 74 75 77 i ii

Example Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Model Plausibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sensitivity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5

Implementation into existing LCC-Tool 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 Function Definition and Input Modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Estimating the Shop Visits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Processing the Predefined Shop Visits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Consideration of Spare Engine Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Estimation of Required Shop Visit Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definition of Last Shop Visits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Output Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6

Summary and Conclusion

Bibliography List of Figures List of Tables

Appendix
A Maintenance Costs A.1 Engine MRO Cost Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.2 Shop Visit Cost Driver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B Database B.1 Aircraft Commerce Shop Visit Reserves & Intervals Example Table . . . . . . . .

ii
iii iii iii iv iv

Contents

IV

B.2 Classification of Aircraft Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B.3 Core Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C Regression Analysis C.1 First Interval SH Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C.2 Mature Interval SH Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C.4 Mature Interval MLH Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C.5 First Shop Visit Restoration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C.6 Mature Shop Visit Restoration Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C.7 LLP Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D Model Parameters

iv v vi vi vii ix x xi xii xiii

C.3 First Interval MLH Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

D.1 Averaged Short-Haul-Engine Severity Curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii D.2 Averaged Medium-Long-Haul-Engine Severity Curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiv D.3 Time & Material Factor Curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E Model Analysis xv xvi

List of Abbreviations
AC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aircraft ACA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aircraft Commerce articles AD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Airworthiness directive BLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bureau of Labor Statistics BPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bypass ratio CER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cost estimating relationship DB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data base DMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Direct maintenance cost DOC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Direct operating costs ECI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Employment cost index ECM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine condition monitoring EF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Environment factor EFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine flight cycle EFH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine flight hour EGT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exhaust gas temperature EGTM . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exhaust gas temperature margin EMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine maintenance costs EPR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine pressure ratio FADEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . Full authority digital engine control FOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign object damage FR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . First-run HPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . High pressure compressor HPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . High pressure turbine IMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Indirect operating costs IOC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Indirect operating costs IPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Intermediate pressure compressor LCFH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Life cycle flight hours LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Life limited part LM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Line maintenance LPC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Low pressure compressor LPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Low pressure turbine MIF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maintenance inflation factor MLH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Medium-long-haul MR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mature-run

V

Contents

VI

MRO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul OAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Outside air temperature OEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Original equipment manufacturer PM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parts manufacturer approval PPI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Producer price index SEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spare engine costs SF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Severity factor SH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Short-haul SLOATL . . . . . . . . . . . Sea level outside air temperature limit SV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shop visit SVC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shop visit costs SVR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shop visit rate SVRC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shop visit restoration costs TE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temperate environment TIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Turbine inlet temperature TMF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time & material factor TOC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Total operating costs TOW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time On-Wing TOW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Time on-wing TSF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three-spool factor TSFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thrust specific fuel consumption TWR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thrust-weight ratio USD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . US Dollar WPG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Workscope planning guide

List of Symbols
Symbol BaseInterval Unit EF H Description Base interval between shop visits determined through CER BaseSV RC EF H
U SD EF H

Base SV restoration costs per EFH determined through CER

BaseSV R

U SD EF H

Base shop visit rate determined through BaseInterval

EF H LC

EF H

Accumulated engine flight hours throughout the life cycle

Interval LLP Cost LLP CostEF H SEC SV C SV C EF H SV C LC

EF H
U SD EF C U SD EF H

Interval length between shop visits Costs per EFC incurred by LLP replacement Costs per EFH incurred by LLP replacement Costs incurred by providing spare engines Total costs for a shop visit Total SVC per EFH Accumulated engine shop visit costs throughout the life cycle

U SD U SD
U SD EF H

U SD

SV R SV RC

SV s 1000 EF H

Number of shop visits per 1000 EFH Total costs for the engine’s performance restoration

U SD

SV RC EF H U til ann Y ears LC

U SD EF H

SV restoration costs per EFH Annual utilization of an engine Number of years of the engine life cycle

EF H years

VII

1 Introduction
The global market for passenger and freight air transportation has tremendously grown over the past decades and it is expected to keep expanding at a high pace. At the same time, the airlines see themselves in a more competitive market environment, especially with the emerging number of low-cost-carriers that has marked a turning point in the market structure. In order to stay competitive, airlines need to constantly seek cost saving potentials. This ambition is closely linked to evaluating new technologies and their possible contribution to reducing the long term costs for owning and operating the entire aircraft system throughout its life cycle. A considerable share of these life cycle costs (LCC) are expenditures for maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) of the individual aircraft systems. The biggest proportion of the aircraft MRO costs is incurred by the engine (fig. 1.1).

Components MRO 21% Engine MRO 35%

Line Maintenance 21% Modifications 9% Airframe Heavy MRO 14%

Figure 1.1: Aircraft MRO cost overview [Jet08]

Most aircraft engines used in today’s air transportation industry are gas turbine engines. The mechanical complexity of these engines results in considerable labour costs required for MRO related tasks such as disassembly, inspection, reassembly and test. In addition, the engine design requires highly tensile and thermo resistant materials, which results in high material costs for repair and replacement of worn parts. Therefore, engine MRO is considered as cost driver and it is in the interest of aircraft operators to estimate the life cycle costs caused by engine maintenance, when making decisions regarding their engine fleet.

1

1.1 Thesis Objectives

2

1.1 Thesis Objectives
The objective of this thesis is to develop a model that is capable of predicting the MRO costs of commercial jet engines, using the method of parametric cost modeling based on available historic data. The focus of the model is supposed to lie on the engine MRO that is performed in regular intervals off-wing in dedicated engine workshops. Therefore, it should also enable the estimation of engine maintenance intervals. This work is intended to complement that of Schilling [Sch09], which established a method for considering the various maintenance events of an aircraft life cycle as part of a LCC simulation tool realized in Matlab. The newly developed model is supposed to elaborate the existing consideration of engine maintenance as part of the LCC maintenance module. The LCC-tool enables the evaluation of technologies under the incorporation of expertise in form of technology factors. Therefore, the model is not aimed to forecast accurate figures of engine MRO costs and intervals. Rather, it is intended to qualitatively reflect the general influence factors of engine maintenance and estimate reasonable cost and interval figures accordingly. In support of the development of the engine MRO model, this thesis is meant to serve as a review on basic concepts and relationships in jet engine maintenance. The aim of this review is a better understanding of the decisive characteristics that affect the maintenance costs of aircraft engines.

1.2 Thesis Structure
To meet the specific objectives, this thesis is structured into three major sections. First Section The first section (chapter 2) includes a brief introduction to gas turbine engines in general followed by an extensive literature review on engine maintenance and parametric cost modeling. Second Section The second part (chapters 3 and 4) describes the process of developing cost

estimating relationships using a methodical approach introduced in the first section. Therefore, an adequate database is assembled based on available data sources. The resulting database is then statistically analyzed in order to establish valid cost estimating relationships. Building on these relationships and based on the conclusions of the literature review, the considerations that led to the final engine maintenance model are subsequently described including a demonstration of an example application. Finally the model is checked for its plausibility using additionally available independent data and its sensitivity on changes of different input parameters is illustrated. Third Section The third section (chapter 5) revolves around implementing the developed model

into the existing LCC simulation tool. The model is implemented in an independent sub module that is integrated in the existing programme sequence. However, the implementation required a few minor adjustments to the input file as well as to the tool structure itself. All changes are respectively documented.

2 Literature Review
This chapter is an summary of the reviewed literature and provides a theoretical background for the present study. It is structured in three sections. First an overview of the working principle and the composition of aircraft gas turbine engines is given, followed by an analysis of the various aspects in engine maintenance. The last section reviews relevant concepts for the modeling of engine maintenance costs.

2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines
The first successful application of gas turbines engines for powering an aircraft in 1939 was preceded by a long development time. Simple gas turbines have been used as windmills since ancient times. However, it was not before the industrial revolution in the 19th century that first attempts were made to use gas turbines for propulsion. As a result of this early gas turbine engines were developed, shortly after the first successful engine driven flight in the beginning of the 20th century. Since then, the development grew rapidly. Bill Gunston [Gun95] describes in detail the evolution of the turbine aero engine from the early prototypes over the first applications in second world war to modern civil and military aircraft engines. Today, there are several different kinds of gas turbine engines, all sharing the same basic engine core principle [Tew07]. A brief description of this engine core and its basic principles will be addressed in the next sections along with a closer look at the turbofan engine, which is by far the most common engine used in today’s civil aviation. Since the cost estimation model as result of this work is based on cost information from turbofan maintenance, it is important to have a rough picture of their layout and composition.

2.1.1 Basic Principles
The gas turbine engine is an internal combustion engine based on the following process: a continuous flow of air is sucked in an inlet, densified by a compressor, heated up by burning fuel in the combustion chamber and eventually leaves through a turbine. The compressor and the turbine are placed on one shaft and is sometimes referred to as a spool. Therefore the compressor is powered by using a part of the kinetic energy from the hot compressed air, that escapes through the turbine. Gas turbine engines also handle the working fluid in a smooth continuous flow and each part of the working cycle takes place simultaneously in a different part of the engine, unlike in piston engines. This basic configuration consisting of a compressor, a combustion chamber as well as a turbine is the engine core, which all gas turbine engines have in common.

3

2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines
fuel

4

1
air

2
combustion chamber

3

4
pressure

The Brayto
exhaust
q 2
com sio pres n

3
ion ns pa ex

W compressor turbine

1

4 volume

Figure 2.1: Engine core of gas turbine engines

The working cycle of such gas turbines is called the Brayton cycle. The cycle efficiency depends
fuel

Engine DMC [$/EFH]

on the achieved temperature ratio T3 /T1 as well as on the given pressure ratio p2 /p1 . A closer Redline EGT look on the thermal and cycle efficiencies of gas turbine engines is given in [Cum97]. to low due
High Cost utilization

EGT [C°]

3

EGT Margin

4
pressure

The Brayton Cycle
2
com sio pres

Take-Off EGT

3
ion ns pa ex

pressure

mbustion hamber

exhaust

q

q 2 3

Target TOW

Corner Point

SLOATL

OAT [C°]
4 temperature
The engine becomes less efficient, due to wear of compressor/turbine blades

Engine T

n

W turbine
EGT [C°]

1

4 volume

1
Redline EGT

Figure 2.2: Working cycle of a gas turbine engine
EGT Margin

There are two ways of generating thrust from this working principle. On loss of efficiency has The the one hand, the Deteriorated Engine
to be hot high pressure airflow leaving the turbine can be accelerated to high speed by compensated by a nozzle behind an increased fuel burn

the turbine. This is called jet propulsion. The other approach is to utilize the kinetic energy of the air flow mainly for providing shaft power to drive a propeller. In such a set up, there isburn New Engine The increase in fuel still Redline EGT
results in an exhaust air flow that to low thrust. However, the main a higher EGT share of the due can contribute to the over allIncreasing cost utilization propulsion is generated by a turbine driven propeller or fan. Whereas jet propulsion is based on due [C°] OAT to extended

Engine DMC [$/EFH]

High Cost

Take-Off EGT workscopes accelerating a relatively small mass of air at high speed, the propeller accelerates a large mass of

air at much lower speed [Bur97]. Several gas turbine engine types have developed out of this working principle. These types are briefly outlines in the following: Target
TOW
EGT Limit

SLOATL

The turbojet is the earliest and simplest type of all gas turbine engines [Gun95]. It Engine Time On-Wing consists OAT [C°] of an air-intake an engine core as described above and a nozzle to accelerate the exhaust air flow. The turbojet is a pure jet propulsion engine, thus the turbine is supposed to extract
Restoration Installation just enough energy from the gas flow to drive the compressor, so that as much energy as possible in Shop Visit

Turbojet

Loss Redline EGT is left in the The engine becomes less flow to form the propulsive jet. The turbojet engine provides a great amount of

efficient, due to wear of compressor/turbine blades The loss of efficiency has to be compensated by an increased fuel burn

EGTM Erosion [C°]

Engine Flight Cycles

Engine Time

eteriorated Engine

2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines

5

thrust at high speed and high altitude, but has the disadvantage of low thrust at low forward speeds (i.e. take-off). Turboprop Turboprop engines consist of the engine core like the turbojet but with the addition

of a propeller output reduction gear and a second propeller shaft, which makes this engine type more complicated and heavier than other gas turbine engines. Unlike turbojets it is the aim to extract all the energy from the gas flow in the turbine and convert it into shaft power for driving a propeller. Hence the turboprop generates only a small amount of jet propulsion. Turboprop engines are characterized by a high propulsive efficiency at low airspeeds. The engine is therefore able to develop very high thrust at take-off. However, together with the propulsive efficiency the thrust falls rapidly at speeds above 800 km/h. Turbofan Like the other gas turbine engines, the heart of the turbofan engine is the core turbine.

In addition, it has a duct-enclosed fan which is usually mounted on the front of the engine. The air entering the engine passes through the fan and splits into two separated air streams. The core stream provides the working fluid for the combustion cycle, whereas the second stream bypasses the engine core, hence its name, bypass airflow. In the following section, the turbofan engine is discussed in some detail. Propfan A recent development of gas turbine engines is a combination of the Turbofan and the Turboprop. The propfan, also known as ultra-high-bypass- or open rotor jet engine, is featured by an unducted propeller of radically different design to conventional propellers [OCE91]. There are two types of propfans, one with the propeller module in the front of the engine and one at the rear of the turbine module. This design is said to result in a very low fuel consumption at high sub-sonic speeds.

2.1.2 The Turbofan Engine
As mentioned earlier, the turbofan is the main engine used in today’s commercial aircraft. The development of these engines began early, almost simultaneously with the first turbojet engines in the 1930’s [Gun95]. In order to improve the low efficiency of the turbojet at take-off and subsonic speeds, it was proposed to use extra turbine shaft power to drive a bigger compressor (fan), that could accelerate a way bigger airflow at lower speeds. This low speed airflow is bypassed around the engine core and usually expands in a separate nozzle at the outlet. The result of this concept is the turbofan or bypass engine. It is usually realized in a multiple-spool configuration. This allows the big fan to rotate independently from the compressor stages of the engine core. The turbofan can be seen as a compromise between turbojet and turboprop [FAA04]. The turbofan is featured by an increased thrust at low forward speeds, similar to a turboprop. However, its thrust is not penalized with increasing airspeed up to about Mach 1. The thrust specific fuel consumption (TSFC) as well as the specific weight of the turbofan engine fall between turbojet and turbofan. Noteworthy is also the considerable lower noise level of turbofans due to the

2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines

6

low exhaust velocity of the bypassed airflow. The sum of these features makes the turbofan applicable for a wider range of aircraft in comparison to turbojet and turboprop engines. A more detailed comparison of the three gas turbine engines and their characteristics along with descriptive diagrams that show the correlation between net thrust as well as TSFC and the airspeed at sea level and in high altitude is given in [Tre79].

bypass airflow core airflow

source: GE [modified]

Intake

Fan

LPC

Engine Core [HPC - Combustor - HPT]

LPT

Nozzle

Figure 2.3: GEnx-2B - high bypass twin-spool turbofan

The amount of air that is bypassed in relation to the airflow going through the engine core is called bypass-ratio (BPR). Turbofans can be distinguished in low and high-bypass engines. The former have a BRP in the range of 0.2:1 to 1:1 and can be found in super-sonic combat aircraft due to their fuel economy at high speeds [Hue03]. Engines with a BPR of 5:1 and more are termed high bypass-ratio engines. Today they practically make up all engines in high sub-sonic military and civil aircraft. Similar to a turboprop, most of the total thrust of high bypass turbofan engines is produced by the bypass air accelerated in the fan stage, whereas the engine core primarily acts as gas generator providing the power to drive the turbines. Generally speaking, a higher BPR leads to a reduced TSFC. However with increasing BPR also the size and weight of the engine rise. As a result of this, the BPR is somewhat limited by factors like available ground clearance under the wing or tolerable stress in the wing structure. The design of conventional turbofan engines can also be distinguished between two-spool and three-spool configurations. In the more common two-spool turbofan, the low-pressure compressor (LPC) stages and the fan stages are mounted on one shaft together with the low-pressure turbine (LPT). The second shaft is hollow and contains the high-pressure compressor (HPC) as well as the high-pressure turbine (HPT). In order to reach higher bypass-ratios in an effort to reduce the fuel consumption, fan diameters of turbofan engines have been steadily increased over the last decades. However, the tip speed of fan blades is limited to less than supersonic, due to material constraints. Since the fan and LPC of two-spool turbofans are places on the same shaft,

2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines

7

the rotational speed of the LPC is limited to the tolerable revolutions per minute (RPMs) of the fan. Therefore, the LPC and HPC need a relatively high number of stages to achieve high compression ratios. The three-spool concept was developed to overcome this issue. The fan and the first compressor module in the core engine are mounted on different shafts so that they can turn at different RPMs. The result of this is an intermediate-pressure compressor (IPC) that can turn faster then the LPC of a two-spool engine. Since the compressors turn at higher RPMs, they also require less stages, which leads to a shorter and lighter design and generally to more durability than two-spool engines of the same size. The configuration with the fan, IPC and HPC each placed on different shafts and driven by a dedicated turbine also makes it possible that each spool can turn at optimized velocity. The disadvantage of the three-spool design is the complexity of its construction [Air08a].
LPC + Fan

1 Introduction HPC

Turbines Fan

IPC

Turbines HPC

two-spool

three-spool

1.1 Engine Systems in General Figure 2.4: Comparison: two- and three-spool configuration
A turbine engine consists of its main components, which change the state of the gas flow in the sequence of the thermodynamic working cycle. The design of modern turbofan 2.1.2.1 Layout and Module Characteristics engines follows a modular concept. Thus a typical twin-spool turbofan engine, like the V2500-A5 shown in Fig. 1.1, is composed engines follows a modules: The design of today’s turbofan of the following main modular concept. This modular design essentially Fan module reflects maintenance•aspects. Each of the modules has its own identity, service history and specific • Low pressure compressor module

inspection schedules. During a shop visit, any of the individual modules can be removed from the • Core engine or gas generator engine as an entire • Low pressure turbine module it into its piece parts. Figure 2.5 illustrates the unit without disassembling modular structure of a typical two-spool turbofan engine (IAE V2500-A5). A short description The core engine consists of the high pressure compressor, the combusof each of this maintion section and the high pressure turbine. This modular design of the enmodules is given below.
gine mainly reflects maintenance aspects. During engine disassembly each
Fan Module Low Pressure Core Engine Compressor Module Module Low Pressure Turbine Module

• Accessory gearbox module

Accessory Gearbox Module

Fig.Figure 2.5: The main modules of a V2500-A5 [Lin08] 1.1 The main modules of a V2500-A5

2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines

8

Fan

The fan is simply a specialized type of a compressor and usually contains one stage. The

fan draws air into the engine, compressing the bypass airflow to produce most of the engines thrust and supplying air to the gas turbine core. The fan module consists of the fan disk with fan blades mounted to the low-pressure shaft. Today’s fan blades and disks are made of titanium alloys. However, more and more blades of newer generation models are also made of carbon fibre reinforced plastics (CFRP) [Rol07]. Low-Pressure Compressor The main purpose of the LPC is to increase the pressure of the air

through the gas turbine core. In this example, the LPC module contains not only the lowpressure compressor case and stages, but also the fan case. Large civil gas turbine engines that are considered in this paper have axial-flow compressors. That means the air is compressed in a direction parallel to the engine axis. An axial-flow compressor is made up of alternating stages of rotating blades and static vanes. In order to achieve a high pressure rise, the compression is spread over a number of stages. Today’s LPC blades and vanes are generally made of aluminum alloys [Cum97]. Core Engine The core engine module consists of the inner casings, a high-pressure shaft, a high-pressure compressor, the combustion system as well as the high-pressure turbine. The HPC is used in conjunction with the LPC and also contains alternating stages of rotor blades and stator vanes, which further compress the air before it is supplied to the combustor. It is especially the later stages of a HPC that handle an airflow at considerable higher temperature and pressure, which is why the blades and vanes are made of more temperature resisting titanium and nickel alloys. In the combustion system, fuel is burnt with the air received from the compressor modules, sending hot gas downstream to the HPT. It consists of a combustion chamber, a fuel injector, an igniter and nozzle guide vanes. The following HPT is made up of one or more turbine rotors as well as a set of stationary nozzle guide vanes. The HPT converts part of the energy stored within the hot gas into kinetic energy to drive the HPC and the accessory gearbox. Both combustor and HPT are exposed to the maximum temperatures that occur in the engine therefore, cooling air and ceramic coated nickel alloys are used to increase component lives. Generally, in a running engine, it is the core engine module that is subjected to the most compelling conditions in terms of temperature, pressure and rotational velocity. Thus, it will be the module that suffers the fastest deterioration of performance [Ack10]. Low-Pressure Turbine The LPT module is located in the rear of the engine downstream of the

HPT module. It is an assembly of disks with turbine blades that are attached to the low pressure shaft, nozzle guide vanes and a rear frame. The LPT removes the remaining energy from the combustion gases to power the LPC module. Accessory Gearbox The accessory gearbox is attached to the bottom or side of the engine. The aircraft engine not only provides thrust, but it also supplies power for engine and aircraft accessories. This includes starters, fuel and oil pumps as well as hydraulic pumps and generators

2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines

9

for cabin power. The accessory gearbox is where all this mechanical-driven components are mounted to the engine. This compound of main engine modules can be referred to as basic engine. However, this basic engine by itself is not operable and cannot serve all necessary functions. In addition to its main components the engine needs various systems to become operable. These engine-related systems include amongst others an air cooling and sealing system, a lubrication system, a fuel distribution system, an exhaust and thrust reverser system as well as an air inlet and a nozzle [Lin08]. 2.1.2.2 Engine Operating Parameters Modern aircraft are equipped with a multitude of gauges to provide the flight crew with feedback information about the engine condition. The main operating parameters contain the speeds of the engine spools and the engine pressure ratio (EPR) for performance monitoring, as well as the temperatures of the turbine gases for health monitoring. A brief description of these key operating parameters is given below: N1 and N2/N3 speeds In a jet engine, every main revolving section has a separate gauge to

monitor its RPMs. Depending on the engine type, the N1-gauge keeps track of the LPC and/or fan speed. The core section is monitored by the N2-gauge, whereas a three-spool engine has an additional N3-gauge. Due to the high revolving velocities, the RPMs of the engine spools are displayed as percentage of the design RPM rather than actual RPM. The N1-speed is the primary indication of thrust on most turbofans [FAA04]. Engine Pressure Ratio (EPR) The EPR is the total pressure ratio across the engine and is defined as the ratio of the pressure at turbine exit (exhaust) to the pressure at the intake. On some turbofans, it serves as primary thrust indication gauge. Turbine Inlet Temperature (TIT) The TIT is the gas temperature from the combustor exit as it enters the first HPT stage. As the highest temperature inside a gas turbine engine, the TIT is one of the limiting factors for the power output of an engine. However, it is difficult to measure therefore, the exhaust gas temperature (EGT) is usually the parameter measured. Exhaust Gas Temperature (EGT) The EGT is the temperature of the exhaust gases as they enter the tail pipe, after passing through the LPT. It is expressed in degrees centigrade and can be seen as one of the most important health monitoring parameters. The engine gas temperatures have to be closely monitored, as exceeding temperature limits may lead to serious heat damage to the turbine components [FAA04]. In addition, the EGT is a measure of the engine’s efficiency in producing its design level of thrust. A high EGT may indicate that the engine has suffered significant hardware deterioration during service. Generally, the EGT reaches its maximum during take-off or right after lift-off, as the engine operates here at its peak.

2.1 Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines

10

EGT Margin (EGTM)

fuel In order to measure the level of an engine’s performance degradation,

the so called EGT margin has been introduced. The EGT margin of an engine is the difference

1 4 between the maximum tolerable EGT (Redline EGT) and the peak EGT during take-off. This
pressure

2

3

The B

redline EGT is the absolute temperature limit, which cannot be exceeded without damaging the combustion air exhaust q engine [Bra04]. Therefore, the EGT margin ischamber a measure for how well below this limit the engine 3 2 operates in times of maximum power output at take-off. As the EGT of an engine increases over time, due to hardware deterioration, the EGT margin decreases. Theoretically, an engine can remain on wing until its EGT margin has become zero. It is normally at its highest level when W 1 the engine is new or has just been refurbished. The EGT margin is furthermore highly influenced by the present outside air temperature (OAT). For a given thrust setting, the EGT rises at a constant rate as the OAT increases. Figure 2.6 compressor turbine shows the relationship between take-off EGT and OAT.
n sio pres com

ion ns pa ex

4 volume

EGT [C°]

Redline EGT EGT Margin Take-Off EGT

Engine DMC [$/EFH]

High Cost due to low utilization

Corner Point

SLOATL

OAT [C°]

En

Figure 2.6: Correlation between Take-Off EGT and OAT [Air06b]

efficient, due to wear (FADEC). It is programmed to provide constant maximum thrust with increasing OAT. As the of

EGT [C°]

Redline EGT The pictured curve is a result of the power management schedule of the digital engine controller less The engine becomes

OAT rises, the air density EGT Margin Therefore, the throttle has to be increased in order to decreases.

compressor/turbine blades

The loss maximum Deteriorated Engine maintain constant thrust, which results in an increase in EGT. However, constant of efficiency has

thrust is only maintained up to a certain OAT (corner point). The FADEC is then programmed an increased fuel burn to keep the EGT constant for OATs higher then the corner point temperature. This power management setting is called flat rating and makes sure that the engine operates with enough burn New Engine The increase in fuel EGT margin also at high OATs. The constant EGT is maintained by reducing results in a higher EGT the engine thrust as the OAT rises beyond the corner point [Air06b]. Without flat rating, the EGT would continue OAT [C°] to rise with increasing OAT as the dashed line in fig. 2.6 indicates. The OAT at which the EGT would reach the redline EGT, if maximum take-off thrust was maintained is termed sea level OAT can be determined by calculating the SLOATL. Since the EGT margin is the main indicator for an engine’s health status, it is normally expressed independently from the OAT. That means the EGT margin is given as the difference between
EGT Limit

to be compensated by

EGTM Erosion [C°]

outside air temperature limit (SLOATL). The actual highest permitted thrust setting for a given

Installation Loss

Restoration in Shop Visit

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

11

redline EGT and the actual EGT at maximum thrust at the corner point OAT (fig.2.6).

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance
This section is supposed to give an overview over the different aspects and in engine maintenance. The aircraft engine as a major airplane component, in terms of investment, operating cost as well as its complexity, follows its own maintenance schedule mainly independently from the regular maintenance check events of the remainder aircraft. For a more detailed discussion of the maintenance programme of an aircraft, it is referred to [Sch09]. Engine maintenance is a broad field that includes not only engineering but also various complex planning and management problems. As such, it is often also referred to as engine management. Modern engine maintenance is based on the so called on-condition method. After this method, engines removals and overhauls only take place when the engine condition demands it [Rup00]. Whereas in the past, engines were removed and maintained after a fixed time interval (hard-time interval), which had the disadvantage of engines being removed, even in case of a safe operating engine. Similar to the maintenance of the remainder aircraft, engine maintenance can be divided into on-wing and off-wing maintenance or overhaul, in the following referred to as shop visit (SV). The next two subsections will discuss both maintenance components. Subsequently, engine time on-wing and maintenance cost are discussed separately, due to their importance for the proposed model.

2.2.1 On-Wing Engine Maintenance
On-wing engine maintenance, also known as engine line maintenance, includes all maintenance and inspection activities that can be done without engine removal and disassembly on the flight line. As such it is generally included into the line maintenance schedule of the aircraft operation. As as result of the on-condition maintenance concept, a great share of on-wing maintenance activities involves Engine Condition Monitoring. The aim is to monitor and analyze the main operating parameters as well as the internal physical condition of the engine, in order to identify potential problems before they become serious and to provide data that can be used to determine the most economic times for engine shop visits. A second group of tasks can be summarized as On-Wing Repair and Replacement. In the recent past, more and more actions have been developed to access the site of engine damage directly on-wing and without complete disassembly. As a result of this, more engine problems can be fixed on-wing, which significantly extends the time on-wing (TOW) of the engine [Bur10]. The following is a more detailed discussion on both kinds of on-wing maintenance. 2.2.1.1 Engine Condition Monitoring (ECM) Today’s ECM systems evolved as a result of aviation authorities requiring flight crews to monitor basic engine performance parameters from the flight deck instruments. The recorded data was then used by the engineering departments of the airlines to determine the maintenance programme

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

12

for the engine. Therefore, ECM data was historically recorded manually and only during take-off and once in the cruise. On modern aircraft, ECM information is gathered automatically in higher number and quality and can even be recorded and transmitted to a ground station in real-time [Air05a]. The engine performance parameters that are measured can be divided into two categories. The first consists of parameters that are not heavily influenced by flight conditions and engine thrust, like engine vibrations as well as oil temperature and pressure. The second type of parameters comprise those that are affected by flight conditions and thrust. These parameters include the gas path temperatures like the EGT, EPR, fuel flow as well as the N1 and N2 speeds. In order to also provide data for indications of the present flight conditions, parameters like altitude Mach number and air temperature are measured and recorded as well [Air05a]. The key objective of ECM is to plot the performance trend data, so that it can be compared to a model of how the engine is expected to behave under the experienced flight conditions. Shifts in performance indicate hardware deterioration or operational problems. Combinations of specific parameter changes are known to be indications for specific deviations in the engine. The data can be further interpreted to find out which part of the engine is inducing the problems. This analysis of the recorded data is undertaken by specialized ECM software usually provided by the original equipment manufactures (OEMs). It is expected that future ECM systems will capture more accurate data and have more elaborated data interpretation capabilities than the current generation [Air06c]. In addition to the recording and analysis of engine performance data, ECM also includes monitoring the physical condition of internal engine parts with the help of inspection borescopes. An inspection borescope is an optical diagnosis tool comprising of a long flexible tube and an optical lense, that gives an magnified and illuminated view of hardly accessible areas inside the engine. It allows to inspect internal engine parts for defects such as cracks, stress fractures and corrosion. To sum up, ECM allows the concept of on-condition maintenance of aircraft engines. It helps to manage the timing of both scheduled and unscheduled shop visits and it prevents excessive hardware deterioration and it provides initial alerts that allow engines to be fixed on-wing [Air05a]. 2.2.1.2 On-Wing Repair and Replacement Aircraft engines usually have a design life that exceeds the achieved actual shop visit intervals by far. This is due to part failures and unexpected damages. For instance, the fan and LPT modules are often the first areas to suffer environmental damage due to their exposure to birds and debris [Bur10]. The ECM systems described above, are able to detect such problems and provide information that help the maintenance engineers to decide if an on-wing repair or replacement should be conducted. Together with ECM systems, the on-wing repair capabilities are getting more and more sophisticated. Today, on-wing maintenance includes repairs that historically have been high-cost shop repairs [Bur10]. However, as a result of progressive hardware deterioration, an engine overhaul is eventually unavoidable. On-wing repair though, contributes to extend the engine’s time on-wing as close to its design life as possible, despite unexpected failures or

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

13

damages. Also falling into this category is the replacement of line replaceable units (LRUs). These are parts that are designed to be quickly replaced on the flight line. They are usually sealed units like, sensors, pumps, filters or tanks and can be replaced independently from their surroundings. On-wing repair and replacement not only has the benefit that it saves the time and money for engine removal and complete disassembly, but also that there is no need for a spare engine in order to keep the aircraft in service. In addition, it can be included into the aircraft’s line maintenance schedule. GE’s On Wing Support for instance, performs flight line repairs like borescope blending of compressor blades, fan module and gearbox workscopes as well as top case compressor repairs [GE 08]. Another technique that falls into this category is the so called engine water wash. It can be done without requiring additional ground time and involves spraying about a hundred liters of water repeatedly into the front of the turning but not burning engine, where the engine cleans itself. This procedure reduces fuel consumption by improving the EGT margin and therefore extends the on-wing intervals [KLM07].

2.2.2 Engine Overhaul - Shop Visit
Despite better on-wing maintenance technology, eventually every engine has to be removed from wing and disassembled in order to get more extensive maintenance. Airlines usually have access to a pool of spare engines. Therefore, the removed engine is immediately replaced by a spare engine for the time the engine is being refurbished. Depending on the engine type, the replacement can be performed by 3-4 mechanics in a full 8-hour shift. Thus, the engine removal can be conducted on the flight line. The overhaul is performed in a dedicated engine workshop, hence its name engine shop visit (ESV). This subsection discusses the main causes that force an engine to be removed and overhauled followed by a brief description of the shop visit process and shop visit management considerations. 2.2.2.1 Main Causes of Engine Removals As previously mentioned, a modern aircraft engine’s condition is constantly monitored. This allows one to predict the time when the engine has deteriorated to a level where an engine overhaul becomes necessary. That means an ESV is generally a scheduled event that repeats in regular predictable intervals. However, especially in situations where an unexpected part failure or damage cant be fixed by on-wing maintenance efforts, an engine has to be removed and sent to the workshop prematurely. The primary engine removal causes can be categorized in four groups: EGT margin degradation, expiry of Life Limited Parts (LLPs), hardware deterioration and other unscheduled removal causes. [Air00]. The causes of engine removals depend heavily on the type of aircraft operation. Engines operating on short-haul routes show a higher percentage of removals caused by EGT margin degradation and LLP expiry, while medium- and long-haul operating engines tend to have a higher share of removals due to hardware deterioration and EGTM degradation. The distribution of the engine removals on the removal causes depending on the aircraft operation and the engine age status is illustrated in figure 2.7. In the following

fuel

2 2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance 1

3

4
pressure q 2
com sio pres

14 The Brayton Cycle
pressure 4 volume 1 Target

combustion air exhaust parapraphs the primary removal causes are briefly discussed. chamber

3
ion ns pa ex

n

W compressor turbine

1

Figure 2.7: Removal causes depending on aircraft operation [Ack10]

High Cost removal driver. EGT margin degradation is a result of the gradual wear of the compressor and EGT turbine blades. Marginleads to a rising clearance between the blade tips and the surrounding This utilization shrouds and thus, to an increasing leakage of the Take-Off EGT in the compressor and turbine working fluid due to low

Redline EGT

Engine DMC [$/EFH]

EGT Margin Degradation

EGT [C°]

The degradation of an engine’s EGTM is one of the dominating

Inc due w

stages [Air08c]. Such leakage causes a decrease in the overall engine efficiency and performance. Therefore, a deteriorated engine has to burn more fuel than a new engine in order to achieve the EGT margin is so little that severe damage to the turbine components cannot be excluded. In same required thrust level. As the engine wear continues, the EGT will ultimately rise until the TOW

this case, the engine needs to get a performance restoration in order to remain operable. Figure Time On SLOATL Corner Point Engine OAT [C°] 2.8 illustrates the effects of engine wear on the EGT margin.
Redline EGT EGT Margin Deteriorated Engine

EGT [C°]

The engine becomes less efficient, due to wear of compressor/turbine blades The loss of efficiency has to be compensated by an increased fuel burn

New Engine

The increase in fuel burn results in a higher EGT

OAT [C°]
Figure 2.8: Effects of engine wear on the EGT Margin [Ack10]

The rate of EGT margin erosion normally depends on the thrust rating as well as on how the
EGT Limit engine is operated. A more detailed discussion on the factors that influence the EGT margin

EGTM Erosion [C°]

$/ESV

erosion rate is given in the following section 2.2.3. Generally, the rates of EGT margin degradation are highest during the first 1000 - 2000 engine flight cycles (EFC) after installation. This is called Installation Loss. The erosion rate stabilizes thereafter and reaches a fairly constant
Restoration level until the the engine is removed [Air05b]. In the following engine shop visit, the EGT

margin is restored. However, it is normally not possible to fully restore the initial EGT margin Loss

Installation

in Shop Visit

$/EFH

Engine Flight Cycles

Engine Time On-Wi

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance
EGT Margin Deteriorated Engine

EGT [C°]

Redline EGT

The engine becomes less efficient, due to wear of 15 compressor/turbine blades The loss of efficiency has

of a new engine. Overhauled engines typically achieve 70%-80% of the initial to be compensated by EGT margin an increased fuel burn level. This contributes to the fact that an engine’s first TOW is usually the longest achieved during its life cycle. Figure 2.9 shows the qualitative relationship between EGT margin erosion
New Engine and accumulated EFC’s. Since an engine’s EGTM is constantly monitored, it isThe increase to fuel burn fairly easy in
results in a higher EGT

determine its actual stabilized EGTM degradation rates. Therefore, it is possible to predict the point where the EGT margin becomes zero. In other words, EGT margin degradation generally OAT [C°] leads to a scheduled ESV.

EGTM Erosion [C°]

EGT Limit

Installation Loss

Restoration in Shop Visit

Engine Flight Cycles
Figure 2.9: Trend of EGT margin erosion rates over accumulated EFC

En

Life Limited Part Expiry Life limited parts (LLPs) are defined as engine rotor and major static structural parts whose failure could result in hazardous engine effects. Such effects include for instance uncontrolled fire or complete inability to shut down the engine. The Advisory Circular (AC) 33.70 [FAA09], issued by the FAA, regulates the standards for the design and testing of engine LLPs. Life limited rotational parts include disks, spools, spacers and shafts, whereas static structural parts generally include high-pressure cases and non-redundant engine mount components. For each LLP, an operating limitation or life limit must be established in order to ensure that no hazardous effect occurs. The life limit specifies the maximum number of finite flights or engine flight cycles (EFC) a LLP is allowed to be in service. The life limit for rotating parts is for example equal to the minimum number of EFC, that is required to trigger a crack of about 7 mm in length by 3.5 mm in depth [FAA09]. The definition of maximum permissible life times for certain engine parts is an exception from the general on-condition maintenance concept for aircraft engines. The life limit of LLPs is defined by the engine manufactures and typically ranges between 15,000-30,000 EFC. However, some individual parts can have restricted lives, due to technical issues and imposed airworthiness directives (AD) [Air04a]. Once an engine has accumulated as many EFC as the shortest life limit of all equipped LLPs, it has to be removed and sent to a workshop in order to replace the used up LLPs. Hence, LLP replacement can be scheduled in coordination with the expected point of full EGT margin erosion. LLP replacement is a major cost driver in engine maintenance and as such it is subjected to several cost saving measures.

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

16

Hardware Deterioration

The third main removal cause is the deterioration of the engine hardware.

All engine components are exposed to different kinds of deterioration mechanisms. These include amongst others, low and high cycle fatigue, thermo-mechanical fatigue as well as corrosion [MM10]. These mechanisms lead to a degradation of the part lives or in worst case to a part failure as well as to a loss of engine performance. In contradiction to LLPs, the remainder engine parts are replaced on an on-condition basis. A safely operating engine therefore relies on a well functioning ECM system to detect problems related to hardware deterioration. The engine’s core module, being exposed to the highest temperatures and revolving velocities within the engine, suffers in particular from the mentioned deterioration mechanisms. These engine failures are practically not predictable but modern ECM systems are capable of detecting them soon after they arise and therefore allow to prevent more severe damage. However, if such an engine hardware deterioration problem cannot be fixed on-wing, it forces the engine to get a premature unscheduled shop visit. Other removal causes The last group includes unscheduled removal causes from foreign object damage (FOD), engine system failures and engine vibration. FOD is engine damage resulting from ingestion of foreign objects. Foreign objects include birds, ice or ash as well as a runway debris [Ack10]. Especially the ingestion of larger objects like birds can lead to significant damage of the fan- and the LPC blades. However, such an incident usually does not affect the safe outcome of a flight and may not even be noticed by the flight crew [Tur04]. But the ingestion of foreign objects poses a risk of latent effects, like minor cracks that can propagate by progressive engine wear. Hence, it is important that the ECM is able to detect the occurrence of FOD. Also falling into this category is engine system failures. Especially lubrication system problems, such as leaks or oil pump malfunctions can result in severe engine damage if they are not fixed. 2.2.2.2 Engine Shop Visit Process Engine shop visits can generally be categorized by the extend of the conducted workscopes and the number of modules on which work is performed. The level of the shop visit has a strong impact on the following removal interval. An extensive shop visit results in a significantly longer time on-wing before the next shop visit becomes due. As mentioned in 2.1.2.1, the individual engine modules are considered independently during a shop visit. This is necessary because they have different rates of deterioration. Therefore each module normally requires different workscopes at each shop visit [Air09]. The workscopes are typically performed in dedicated shop departments, that are specialized on a certain module. It is also not unusual that engine shops outsource the overhaul of individual modules or parts to shops with more capabilities in this particular field. Shop visits that include work on all modules can last up to 50-90 days [ACT08]. A shop visit process following the general incoming inspection and the definition of the objected workscopes is illustrated in figure 2.10. A detailed analysis of the different shop visit stages for each of the main engine modules is given in [Air09].

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

17

Engine Disassembly
• Disassembly into engine modules • Full disassembly of modules into piece parts if necessary

Engine Testing & Release
• Testing of the engine on-wing or in test cell • Updating of engine documents GEnx-2B

Parts Inspection
• Cleaning of parts • non-destructive tests for detecting cracks • Dimensional checks on blades and vanes

Repair & Replacement
• Part repair in special workshops • Replacement of nonrepairable parts

Certification & Reassembly
• Certification of refurbished parts • Balancing of rotables • Reassembly of module units

Figure 2.10: Engine shop visit process
fuel

2.2.2.3 Shop Visit Management

3 The primary objective of shop visit management engine Cycle the long-term engine direct • The Brayton minimize Inspection of is to 4
pressure 2 3 • Workscope definiton
ion ns pa ex

Incoming Inspection

pressure

combustion chamber

exterior and interior maintenance cost (DMC), expressed in cost per flight hour (USD/EFH) [Ack10]. A more detailed • Analysis of engines exhaust service history breakdown of the composition of theqDMC of an engine follows underq2.2.4. A dominant factor

that influences the engine maintenance cost is the time on-wing between shop visits. An increasing more extensive maintenance at each shop visit. This leads to rising shop visit cost as the TOW increases. W Generally, the raised shop1visit costs 4 compensated by the extended removal interval, are 1 4 due to the increased TOW. As a resultvolume the overall maintenance costs per flight hour of this, temperature decrease. However, the increase in engine deterioration accelerates after a certain TOW, with turbine the result that the required shop visit workscopes extend so severely that the shop visit cost are raised to a level, where the overall USD/EFH begin to increase again [Air07a]. Figure 2.11 illustrates this relationship between the engine’s TOW and the DMC per flight hour.
n com sio pres

2

3

Folie 4

Vortrag > Autor > Dokumentname > Datum TOW will result in increased engine deterioration [Air07a]. Hence, the engine modules require

Redline EGT

Engine DMC [$/EFH]

High Cost due to low utilization

Take-Off EGT

Increasing cost due to extended workscopes

Target TOW

nt

SLOATL

OAT [C°]

Engine Time On-Wing
Figure 2.11: Influences of the TOW on the DMC of an engine [Eng10]

Redline EGT

The engine becomes less efficient, due to wear of compressor/turbine blades The loss of efficiency has to be compensated by

Deteriorated Engine

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

18

The aim is to find a balance between shop visit cost and time on-wing, so that the lowest cost per EFH are achieved. This is a challenging task, which requires thoughtful shop visit management. Four key considerations concerning the shop visit management are subsequently discussed: Workscope Planning The level of workscope to be performed on a module or an individual

item is proposed by the workscope planning guide (WPG) , issued by the engine manufacturer [Air09]. However, it also heavily depends on the result of the module inspection, the removal cause, the time on-wing (TOW) since the last shop visit, as well as the extend of previous shop visit workscopes [Air07a]. According to the set operational and economic engine build targets, the workscope plan of a shop visit can individually deviate from the shop visit manual [Jet08]. That means the performed workscopes can be adjusted to meet certain target on-wing times or target shop visit costs. In general, there are three levels of workscopes: Minimum Level, Performance Level and Full Overhaul. A full overhaul on a module involves a complete disassembly to piece-part level and an inspection as well as repair or replacement of all parts. Lighter workscopes, like performance restorations, usually require just partial disassembly and repair works only on certain items [Ack10]. LLP Management The management of the LLPs is essential in minimising maintenance cost,

particularly for engines used on short- and medium-haul operations [Air04b]. In long-haul engines, LLPs account for a smaller share of total maintenance cost. This is because LLPs have fixed lives defined in engine flight cycles (EFC). Therefore they can last for many years in long-haul operating engines, due to the low number of flight cycles (FC) these engines accumulate per year. Short-haul engines on the other hand, accumulate a considerably more FC each year. Hence, their LLPs have to be replaced every few years [Air04a]. As stated in 2.2.2.1 LLP life expiry is a main removal cause that forces an engine into a shop visit. The task of LLP management is to coordinate the remaining lives of the equipped LLPs with other criteria for shop visit timing. Ideally, the LLP replacement would coincide with the optimal TOW as illustrated in Fig. 2.11 as well as with the date of full EGT deterioration. However, these events may occur at a time when some LLPs still have a few thousand EFC left. If not replaced, this remaining life, also called “stub life”, would limit the subsequent removal interval. In order to prevent an early next shop visit, these LLPs have to be replaced and scrapped without utilizing all their available life. However, wasting remaining LLP life raises the average cost per flight hour [Air04b]. It becomes apparent that a compromise between utilization of the LLP lives and optimal time on-wing has to be found in order to achieve the lowest long-term maintenance cost. In short-haul engines, where LLP expiry is the main removal cause and their frequent replacement is a major cost driver, it is common that the shop visit workscopes are tailored around the LLP lives, so that the shop visits coincide with LLP replacement [Air99]. Another key consideration is that LLPs should ideally be replaced during a heavier shop visit, when the engine has gone through a high level of disassembly [Air04a]. This is because replacing LLPs also requires a high degree of disassembly and reassembly. Man-hours for assembly works account for a large percentage of shop visit

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

19

cost. LLP replacement during a light shop visit would increase the necessary workscope and therefore the cost. The lowest maintenance cost per EFH is accomplished when a heavy shop visit coincides with full LLP utilization [Air04b]. PMA Parts PMA stands for Parts Manufacturer Approval and is a combined design and

production approval for modification and replacement parts. A manufacturer who holds the PMA is allowed to produce and sell FAA approved parts that are eligible for installation on type certificated aircraft [FAA10]. Aerospace original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) usually have a strong monopoly position on replacement parts [Ben08]. This results in generally high prices for original parts in the aftermarket. The OEMs legitimate the high margins on their parts with the high level of investment in research and development, required to market a modern aircraft engine. Parts from approved manufacturers are considerably cheaper and the savings potential can range between 45%-75% compared to OEM pricing [Air06b]. With the OEMs continuing to impose yearly price increases of five to six percent for spare parts [Ben08], the PMA market is expected to carry on growing. However, the engine manufacturers are striving to strengthen their position, by restricting technical support and warranty coverage when PMA parts are used in their engines. Yet, the legal status of PMA parts is clear. According to FAA regulations, PMA parts can be seen as equivalent to parts from the original equipment manufacturers [Hol08]. Parts Repair The increasing development of repairs for engine parts has considerably contributed

to the reduction of the overall engine maintenance cost. The two key objectives of parts repair are to maintain the on-wing life and at the same time, reduce the shop visit costs [Air07a]. Repair costs have to be considered against the costs of used parts on the surplus market and new parts either from PMA or from the original parts manufacturer. Most repairs have been developed for airfoils such as blades and vanes, since they have the largest economic impact. But repairs are also developed for other parts that prove to be a major maintenance cost driver as the engine ages. In general, it takes some time and investment for repairs to be developed for new engine models. Hence, repairs are rather available for mature engines [Air07a]. Another consideration is that repaired parts tend to lead to shorter subsequent on-wing life in comparison to engines where parts were replaced. Generally, the reduction in costs makes up for the shorter following shop visit interval and so the overall cost per EFH are lower when utilizing repairs. Repairing parts costs five to 10 times less than replacing them [Air99]. However, the quality of repairs and their effect on the remainder engine has to be considered, since poor quality repairs may result in unscheduled removals. On most repairable parts, two repairs can be performed before they are scrapped at the third removal. In doing so, the costs for the second repair will be higher than the first. This also has to be considered when planning the parts repair strategy for a shop visit.

2.2.3 Engine Time On-Wing
The achieved time on-wing is an important parameter in engine maintenance. Until the engine reaches its target TOW, a longer TOW generally leads to reduced over all shop visit DMC per

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

20

EFH (see figure 2.11). However, engines are often forced into shop visits before reaching this target time on-wing. This happens not only because of unexpected engine damages but also due to accelerated performance deterioration. The previous section demonstrated how shop visit management influences the engine TOW. This section discusses the influence factors on the hardware & EGTM deterioration rates. These factors resulting from the engine built and the operation conditions also heavily influence the engine TOW. They are summarized as follows: • Engine Thrust Rating • Operational Severity • Engine Age 2.2.3.1 Engine Thrust Rating Normally, there are several thrust ratings for a given engine model. The CFM56-7B for instance, comes in six different engine variants, all rated at different thrusts. The basic engine build is the same, the rating is the result of the power control setting of an engine. The engine variants with a higher thrust1 level generate higher gas path temperatures [Air05b]. This results in a lower EGT margin and normally also in a more severe EGT and hardware deterioration, due to the increased thermal stress. Low initial EGT margin and high EGT margin erosion rates will lead quickly to complete EGT margin degradation. That means high rated engines are more likely to be forced to get a shop visit because of full EGT margin deterioration than lower rated ones. Table 2.1 sums up the different engine variants and their EGT related parameters. Engine Variant Thrust [lbs] Initial EGT margin [degC] EGTM erosion [degC/1000EFC] -7B18 19,500 125-130 2.5-4.0 -7B20 20,600 125-130 2.5-4.0 -7B22 22,700 105 2.5-4.0 -7B24 24,200 100 4.0-6.0 -7B26 26,300 60 4.0-6.0 -7B27 27,300 55 4.0-6.0

Table 2.1: Initial EGTM and mature EGT erosion rates for CFM56-7B variants [Air08c]

As a result of the more severe hardware deterioration, higher rated engines generally also tend to achieve shorter times on-wing than engines variants with low thrust ratings. 2.2.3.2 Operational Severity Furthermore an engine’s time on-wing is heavily influenced by its operating conditions. More demanding conditions will result in greater stress on the engine and therefore increase the wear of the engine hardware. The major parameters of operating severity include:
1 thrust as engine specification generally means the maximum take-off thrust

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

21

• Average Flight Time • Take-Off Derate • Outside Air Temperature • Environment Average Flight Time The measurement of time length an engine is operating on-wing can be

quantified in both engine flight hours (EFH) and engine flight cycles (EFC) . A flight hour represents one hour of flight, whereas a flight cycle represents one sequence of take-off, cruise and landing. Both measurements can be frequently found in the literature. However, the number of accumulated EFC is generally the more appropriate measure for engines operating on short-haul routes, while the time on-wing of engines that are operated on medium and long flight times should be considered in terms of EFH [Air08b]. During one flight cycle, it is the take-off and climb phase, where the engine is exposed to the greatest thermal stress and engine wear. The engine hardware deteriorates considerably less during the following cruise and landing. Therefore, the number of accumulated EFH is not a representative time measure for an engine operated on short cycle lengths. Rather it is the number EFC in service, that is an indicator for the engine wear. On the other hand, for medium and long-haul operating engines the accumulated EFH has made its way as a common time on-wing measure in terms of maintenance. Figure 2.12 compares the flight profiles of a short-haul and a medium-haul aircraft. The flight profile of an aircraft can be expressed by the flight hour to flight cycle ratio (FH:FC), also known as the flight leg length or flight time. The average FC:FH is an important parameter for the operational severity of an engine. In general, an engine that operates on a short average flight time will suffer a more rapid performance deterioration and therefore has shorter shop visit intervals and higher DMC per flight hour. Conversely, as the the FC:FH increases the engine is exposed to less wear and can remain longer on wing with reduced USD/EFH. The mean time on-wing between shop visits is often represented by the shop visit rate (SVR) . This characteristic is analogue to the direct maintenance cost per flight hour (USD/EFH) in terms of operational severity. It is defined as
Short-Haul Operation FH:FC = 1.0
sc De
Clim b

Cruise

1 flight hour

1 flight hour

1 flight hour

Medium-Haul Operation FH:FC = 3.0
sc De

Cruise

Tak e-o ff

3 flight hours

SVR & DMC [$/EFH]
short cycle time

ent

Tak e-o ff &

&L and i ng

&C limb

& ent g din Lan

c

Figure 2.12: Two example flight profiles [Ack10]

EGT [C°]

Redline EGT EGT Margin Take-Off EGT

rity Factor

1.6 1.4 1.2

Increasing Dera

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

22

the number of shop visits per 1000 EFH for a given engine [SV/1000 EFH]. A mean TOW of 17000 EFH is for instance equal to a SVR of 1000/17000 = 0.0588. Equation (2.1) describes the conversion from shop visit intervals into SVRs. SV R = 1000 ShopV isitInterval (2.1)

More severe operation conditions will lead to an increase of both, SVR and DMC. The qualitative

relationship between EFH:EFC and the SVR as well as the DMC is illustrated in figure 2.13. eration FH:FC = 1.0

flight hour

1 flight hour

Operation FH:FC = 3.0
sc De & ent

Cruise

ight hours

SVR & DMC [$/EFH]

Figure 2.13: Shop visit rate and DMC in relation to the flight hour flight cycle ratio
1.6

1.4 of the maximum thrust at take-off. This is usually referred to as take-off derate. Derating the

Severity Factor

Take-Off Derate Another issue that influences the operational severity is the manual reduction Redline EGT engine during take-off is in the discretion of the pilot. It ranges between 0-20%, and typically falls between 10-15% [Air04c]. Derating is used when the take-off weight is below the maximum take-off weight of the1.0 aircraft, a long runway is available or the ambient temperatures during Derate
5% take-off are relatively low [Air06c]. The result is a lower EGT at take-off and thus a reduced
0.8

Take-Off EGT

rate of engine deterioration and prolonged time on-wing. In general,15% engines that operate on
SLOATL

nt

short average flight times benefit1.5 more from take-off2.5 derate than those operated on long-haul 3.0 2.0 1.0 OAT [C°] it is generally that the first 5% of derate[h] a bigger impact in terms of reducing EFH:EFC have routes. Also, the operational severity than following derate steps of 5% [Air06d].

Since Redline EGT both the average flightbecomes less level of derate heavily affect the engine’s deterioration, The engine time and the
efficient, due to wear curves to illustrate the combined influence of both paramengine manufacturers develop severityof

eters on the severity of an engine’s operation [Air06d]. These curves are collected from statistical distributions andThe loss of efficiency has perform benchmarking and sensitivity studies in order allow the operators to Deteriorated Engine
to cost of ownership. to achieve the lowestbe compensated by Severity curves are often developed separately for each an increased fuel burn

engine variant of an engine model [Ack10]. Figure 2.14 illustrates an example severity curve.
New Engine
The increase in fuel burn results in a higher EGT

g din Lan

short cycle time

long cycle time

EFH:EFC [h]

Increasing Derate = Lower Severity

1.2

Base Point

10%

compressor/turbine blades

OAT [C°]

$/ESV

Cruise

light hours

SVR &

short 2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance cycle time

Redline EGT

Severity Factor

Take-Off EGT

sc De & ent g din Lan

long cycle time

EFH:EFC [h]

23

1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8

Increasing Derate = Lower Severity

Base Point
Derate 5% 10% 15%
1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

int

SLOATL

OAT [C°]

1.0

EFH:EFC [h]
Figure 2.14: Example severity curve

Redline EGT The engine becomes less Each of the multiple curves in the graph represents one derate level as stated at the right.

These multiple severity curves areblades also expressed in form of a matrix. The output of a compressor/turbine often severity curve is a certain severity factor (SF) , that is used to adjust the SVR or the maintenance
Deteriorated Engine according to The loss of efficiency has The following calculation based on the severity curve cost the operational severity.

efficient, due to wear of

illustrated above will increased fuel burn concept. an demonstrate this
New Engine

to be compensated by

An example engine is operated at an average flight time of EFC:EFH = 2 and an average derate of 5%. Under this base conditions the SVR is known to be 0.05 [SVs/1000 EFH] and results in a higher EGT
The increase in fuel burn

the maintenance cost per flight hour are 100 [USD/EFH]. To estimate how the SVR and the OAT maintenance cost change when the same engine is operated at a flight time of EFC:EFH = 3.0 [C°] and a derate of 10%, the operator can determine the severity factor for these two parameters and subsequently adjust the base cost and SVR.
$/ESV Base engine severity: EF H : EF C = 2.0 [h], Derate = 5%

Base data → SV R = 0.05

SV s U SD and Cost = 100 1000 EF H EF H

Restoration in Shop Visit 1. Determination of severity factor via severity curve → $/EFH

Adjustment to deviating severity: EF H : EF C = 3.0 [h], Derate = 10% SF = 0.8

2. Multiplication of SF with base SVR and Cost SV s Engine Flight Cycles Engine Time On-Wing = 0.8 · 100 = 80 U SD and Cost results in → SV R = 0.8 · 0.05 = 0.04 1000 EF H EF H Therefore the operator can expect 20% reduced SVR and cost, if the engine is operated under less severe conditions as proposed in the example. Outside Air Temperature As demonstrated in figure 2.6, the EGT during take-off is directly

influenced by the ambient air temperatures. In order to prevent the engine from operating at EGTs that could result in severe damage, the digital engine control keeps the EGT and EGT margin constant at all OATs above the corner point temperature, by reducing the engine’s thrust.

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

24

However, at OATs below the corner point, the thrust is kept constant and the available EGT margin increases as the OAT decreases [Air07b]. In other words, low ambient air temperatures result in low gas path temperatures, which reduces the thermal stress on the engine’s hardware and thus prolongs engine time on-wing. Environment Also contributing to the severity of an engines operation are environmental conditions. Particulate matter that results from air pollution, such as dust, sand, industry emissions or volcanic ash can erode compressor and turbine blades as well as block cooling holes. Salty environments in coastal areas will accelerate corrosion and oxidation of the engine components [Jet08]. These environmental conditions can have a severe impact on the engine’s hardware deterioration and thus, on the time on-wing. 2.2.3.3 Engine Age A general observation from analyzing engine maintenance data is that older engines remain on-wing shorter and cost more to maintain than newer engines. In terms of maintenance, engines can therefore be distinguished in first-run and mature-run phases. There is no clear definition when an engine’s mature phase starts. Maturity may begin as early as after the first shop visit, depending on the engine model. In general, first-run engines will achieve considerably longer times on-wing than subsequent runs, as a result of increasing rates of hardware deterioration as the engine ages. However, once the engine reaches maturity, the shop visits intervals and cost stabilize to a relatively steady state [Ack10]. The engine phase also has a significant influence on the cause of engine removals as previously seen in figure 2.7.

2.2.4 Engine Maintenance Costs
Prior to this section, several references to the influence factors on engine maintenance costs (EMC) have been made. This subsection shall further discuss the EMC as part of the total operating costs (TOC) of an aircraft including a cost breakdown structure as it is considered in the scope of this paper. Aircraft TOC are generally divided into direct operating costs (DOC) and indirect operating costs (IOC) [Ros90]. DOC comprise of all costs, that can be clearly allocated to the aircraft operation including fuel costs, crew costs and maintenance, while IOC consist of all general costs indirectly related to the aircraft operation, like costs for planning and organization as well as marketing and ticket sales. A more detailed cost breakdown structure of aircraft TOC can be found in [Pet08]. Engine maintenance costs are generally considered to be part of the direct operating costs. Modeling the DOC of an aircraft has historically been an important tool to evaluate the economics of an aircraft design. Thus, there are various different DOC methods that include EMC as part of the total maintenance costs. Many DOC methods are based on the ATA 1967 DOC method [Air67]. An example is the DOC method after Roskam [Ros90], where the EMC per flight hour comprise three components: labour, material and maintenance burden costs. The division of maintenance cost in labour- and material costs can be found in most cost estimation publications reviewed in the scope of this project. The maintenance burden

2.2 Aircraft Engine Maintenance

25

are allowances to reflect general charges for facilities, spare engines and engine leasing, training of the staff or general engineering and administrative services related to engine maintenance. Therefore, some DOC methods consider these charges as indirect operating costs and do not include maintenance burden, as in [Sch98] or [AEG00]. In this context, engine maintenance costs are often also divided into direct maintenance cost (DMC) and indirect maintenance costs (IMC). The focus lies in general on the estimation of the DMC since they are the more meaningful benchmark for comparing two engine designs and they are directly influenced by the aircraft operation [CFM09]. Section 2.3.1 analyzes the reflection of EMC within common DOC models in more detail. 2.2.4.1 Cost Breakdown Structure of Engine Maintenance The cost breakdown is the foundation of a cost estimating model. The objective is to provide a reliable structure that includes all elements the cost estimate will cover [NAS08]. The following structure is based on the DMC breakdown in Ackert [Ack10], expanded to also include indirect maintenance costs.

Engine Maintenance Costs

Engine DMC

Engine IMC

Line DMC

Shop Visit DMC
• Labour:

Maintenance Burden
• Providing Facilities: offices, workshops • Staff member training • Administration: planning, engineering

• Line Labour: Line inspection Troubleshooting LRU replacement • Line Material: consumables

assembly/disassembly cleaning, inspection, • Material: replacement of parts and material
• Repair of parts

• Fees, testing, logistics

Spare Engines
• access to spare engines, leased or owned

Input of Shop Visit DMC
Shop Visit DMC [$/EFH] = Shop Visit Cost (SVC)/TOW SVC [$] = Restoration Cost + LLP Cost

Figure 2.15: Engine maintenance cost breakdown structure

While engine line maintenance incurs costs continuously as it is performed in relatively short intervals on the flight line, shop maintenance takes place after comparable long intervals thus causeing costs only during shop visits. Due to the different character of line maintenance and shop visit, they are reflected separately within the engine DMC. The engine line maintenance is included in the aircraft maintenance planning document (MPD). Thus, it has already been implemented into the existing LCC-tool. The IMC include maintenance burden also known as

2.3 Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost

26

overhead costs and charges for spare engines. Figure 2.15 also illustrates an alternative way of accounting for the shop visit DMC. In contrast to the traditional separation into material and labour costs, it is also common to divide the shop visit costs (SVC) into restoration costs and LLP costs [Ack10][Bec09]. Restoration costs are charges for labour and material related to restoring the engine’s performance, while LLP costs reflect expenditures for the LLP replacement. The shop visit DMC per flight hour are then calculated by dividing the SVC by the mean time on-wing. This cost breakdown correlates with the concept of adjusting maintenance cost via severity factors. It splits up the shop visit cost in one component that depends on the severity and one that is mainly independent from the operational conditions. Only the restoration cost are escalated according to the operational severity. The LLPs are replaced after a hard time independently from the severity of the flight conditions. 2.2.4.2 Common forms of engine maintenance contracts Whereas many airlines historically performed the overhaul of their engines in their own workshops, today the engine overhauls of most airlines are contracted to external MRO service providers. The commissioning of engine overhauls to external shops is based on contracts that contain all services to be performed. There are generally three basic types of payment methods that are typically arranged in the contracts [Rup00]. In the so called Time and Material contracts, the MRO provider issues for each engine a detailed invoice with the required man hours and materials. The customer pays the bill according to the arranged labour rates and material costs. In return, the contracted shop guarantees a certain minimum subsequent time on-wing of the engine. In contrast to this are Fly-By-Hour arrangements, where the airline pays a fixed amount of money per engine flight hour to the MRO provider. The contracted shop has to finance all coming shop visits from the received advance payment. This results in a good predictability of the maintenance cost for the airlines. The third payment method is based on Fixed Prices for certain shop services to be performed. The arranged workscopes vary from full overhauls to limited overhauls on certain modules. There are also diverse hybrid forms possible. The airlines generally try to arrange a customized contract that fits the requirements of the airline and results in low cost and reliable cost forecasting.

2.3 Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost
An overview of concepts for modeling the maintenance costs of aircraft engines is given in the following. Starting with a summary of the reflection of EMC in common DOC methods. Subsequently the basics of cost estimation with focus on parametric cost modeling are also reviewed as background for the development for cost estimating relationships (CERs).

2.3 Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost

27

2.3.1 Reflection of EMC in DOC methods
The analysis of the consideration of the EMC within different DOC methods is a first reference on how engine maintenance costs maybe modeled. Therefore, table 2.2 summarizes the reflection of engine maintenance costs in different DOC models available. For a more explicit comparison of several DOC methods in general it is referred to Mildt [Car00].
DOC Method Cost Breakdown Labour
C lab

Material

C mat

Input
TT O : take-off thrust, labRmhr : labour rate, MTBR, EP: engine price, Esppf: spare part price factor, Khem :MTBR factor

IMC

C lab =

Roskam [Ros90]

C EM C = C lab + C mat + C burden

TO 0.718 + 0.0317 · 1000 1100 M T BR

T

·

C mat =

5.43 · 10−5 · EP · · K 1 Hem
0.05·TT O 104 

+ 0.10 0.645 ·
0.434 FT

· labRmhr
0.05·TT O 104

Esppf − 0.47

C lab =

·

AAE [AAE04]

C mat =

25 ·
0.38 FT

·

C EM C = C lab + C mat + C burden

0.566 +

· FT ·

0.62 +

· FT

TT O : take-off thrust, labRmhr : labour rate, FT: flight time 

labRmhr C mat =
T

AEG [AEG00]

C EM C = C lab +C mat

C lab = 3.26 · 10−5 · TT O · labRmhr

TO 3.63 + 0.91 · 1000

· K2 + 5.07 C LM,lab = C EM C = C LM,lab + C LM,mat + C SV,lab + C SV,mat + C LLP + C N AC a + Fb + F T c T p,day labRmhr · Elab C SV,lab = a · fetops ·
b TT O · BP Rc · (year − 1970)d ·

· ECM

TT O : take-off thrust, labRmhr : labour rate, K2 : material coefficient, ECM: economic efficient 

·

LH [TB07]

labRmhr · Elab · SF

TT O : take-off thrust, labRmhr : labour rate, a,b,c,d:regression coEmat efficients, Elab,mat : cost escalation factor, C SV,mat = a · fetops · fe tops: cost factor, b TT O · BP Rc · (year − 1970)d · SF: severity factor, FT:flight time Emat · SF
2 a + b · TT O + c · TT O

C LM,M at =

· 

Table 2.2: Comparison of EMC consideration in different DOC methods

The structure of the DOC methods is quite similar. All consist of cost components for labour and material adjusted by several regression coefficients and cost factors. However, the LH method sticks clearly out, due to a higher level of cost breakdown and more complex estimation functions. It is the only method that considers the costs for line maintenance (LM) and shop visit (SV) maintenance separately. In addition, there are explicit cost estimation functions for the LLPs (C LLP ) and the engine nacelle (C N AC ). All models include the take-off thrust as major input parameter, while the LH method also considers severity factors for engine de-rate and average flight time and even the Bypass-Ratio (BPR) is reflected. The factor (year − 1970)d models the influence of the age of the engine design.

2.3.2 Parametric Cost Estimation
Parametric cost estimation is based on historical data and mathematical expressions, that relate cost as a dependent variable to selected cost-driving independent variables. The result are so called cost estimating relationships (CERs), which are defined as: Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs) are mathematical expressions relating cost as the dependent variable to one or more independent cost driving variables. [Bru96]

methodologies) for the data available to develop the most accurate cost estimate possible. Based upon the phase that the project/system is entering and the data available to conduct the estimate, follow the quick reference chart shown in Table 1-3 to select the cost estimating methodology (or methodologies). 2.3 Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost 28 Table 1-3. Cost Estimating Methodology Selection Chart
Pre-Phase A Phase A Phase B Phase E A typical CER for instance is estimating the manufacturing cost of aPhase C/D by using the product Parametric product weight [Lon00]. The implicit assumption is that the future cost of a product are affected 4 2 2 by the same forces that affected the cost in the 2 past. This approach is generally applied, 0 when Analogy 4 4 2 2 0

only a few key parameters are known. Therefore, it suits the present problem of estimating 2 2 4 4 4
Engineering Build Up
4 2 0

the maintenance cost of aircraft engines with limited access to detailed primary data sources.
Primary Applicable Not Applicable However, Legend: parameters of an engine, such as weight and thrust, as well as to a certain the key

extend the overall maintenance costs are openly available and can be utilized in a parametric cost analysis. A major advantage is that once the CERs are established, the cost estimates can
Estimates created using a parametric approach are based on historical be conducted quickly and easily replicated [NAS08], which is necessarydata an implementation for and mathematical

Parametric Cost Estimating

into a variable software tool. The analysis. Generally, ancollectionselects parametric cost estimating problem is that the estimator of the necessary data and the variables through regression subsequent determination of CERsdata are known, and time consuming process. implicit when only a few key pieces of is a complex such as weight and volume. The The scope of
assumption of parametric cost estimating is that the same forces that it possible to apply will this study, however, is limited on engine maintenance, which makes affected cost in the past the affect cost in the future. For example, NASA estimating handbook [NAS08] provides further parametric estimation approach. The NASA cost cost estimates are frequently of space systems or software. The data that relates to estimates of these are weight characteristics and design complexity respectively. The major advantage of using a parametric methodology is that the pros andestimateFigure 2.16 be conducted quickly and be easily replicated. Figure 1-12cost estimating. cons. can usually shows the methodological procedure of parametric shows the steps This procedure is the foundation of the data analysis in chapter 3. Therefore, the key stages are associated with parametric cost estimating.

expressions relating cost as the dependent variable to selected, independent, cost-driving

resources on the applicability of different cost estimating methods including a summary of their

briefly discussed in the subsequent paragraphs.
Define Estimating “Hypothesis”

Collect “Relationship” Data

Evaluate & Normalize Data

Analyze Data for Candidate Relationships

Perform Statistical (Regression) Analysis

Test Relationships

Select Cost Estimating Relationship

Figure 1-12. Figure 2.16: Parametric Cost Estimating process steps [NAS08] Parametric Cost Estimating Process Steps

2.3.2.1 Estimating Hypothesis Definition

Volume 1i Page 1-27

The objective of defining an estimating hypothesis is to identify potential cost driving variables and to propose logical cost relationships. This demands a good understanding of the technical character and the requirements of the examined project. The result is a hypothesis of a forecasting model necessary to develop CERs [Bru96].

2.3 Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost

29

2.3.2.2 Data Collection and Evaluation The assembly of a database is essential when deriving cost estimating relationships. A lack of valid CERs is often the result of an inappropriate database [Bru96]. The first step in building up a good database is the data collection. There are generally two types of data, cost and non-cost data. Non-cost data includes technical information coming from drawings, specifications, certification documents or direct measurement as well as schedule and programmatic information that can be obtained from operations departments [BJ82]. Cost data comprises labour hours or direct cost information extracted from accounting systems or through interviews. The data typically comes from many different sources. It is important that the estimator judges the quality of the data origin and identifies the best source [Gal08]. Data can be obtained from internal sources, such as accounting or workshop databases, programme recaps or engineering notes, as well as from external sources like professional articles or public record informations. The disadvantage of external sources is that the user has no knowledge of the procedures used to collect and process the data. It is further distinguished between primary data that is directly obtained from the original source, and secondary data which is derived and possibly “sanitized” from primary data. Hence, primary data is generally considered best in quality and reliability [Gal08]. 2.3.2.3 Data Normalization When establishing a database, it is often discovered that the collected raw data turns out to be irregular and inconsistent or partly in the wrong format for analytical purposes. Therefore, adjustments to the raw data have to be made to ensure a comparable and consistent database [BJ82]. For instance the normalization of raw data adjusts inconsistencies in currencies, measurement units and the scope of the data. Historical data should furthermore be adjusted for anomalies, improvement in technology as well as inflation. Any kind of adjustment or judgments used in processing historical data should be fully documented. The data collection, evaluation and normalization is a fundamental step in generating a parametric cost estimating model. Thus, a considerable amount of time is devoted to assembling a database [Bru96]. 2.3.2.4 Data Analysis The first stage of the data analysis is screening the database for candidate relationships between the dependent and independent variables. This process is built on the hypothesis. However, there may be additional relationships that were not foreseen during establishing hypothesis. Once the candidate relationships have been established, one can perform a regression analysis to model the CERs. The objective of regression analysis is to determine the parameters for the function that fits the set of data best. The data is fit using techniques like: • Linear Regression: unknown parameters are estimated from the data using linear functions • Nonlinear Regression: applied for data that is not essentially linear

2.3 Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost

30

For CERs, the dependent variable is always the cost to be estimated and the independent variable will be the cost driver [NAS08]. The dependent variable responds to changes of the cost driver according to the determined regression function. An example would be the hypothesis that the cost of a product development maybe driven by the weight of the final product. With this assumption one could plot the historical data on cost over weight, with the possible result of the chart in figure 2.17.

cost r(x) = ax + b

data linear regression

weight

Figure 2.17: Example data points for cost-weight dependency

In this case, a linear regression has already been performed with the aim to fit a straight line to the data points. The result is an equation that describes the line, expressed by r(x) = ax + b. In this CER, x represents the weight and r(x) equals the estimated costs. Often, there are more than one independent variable, that have an effect on the cost. Multivariate regression is capable of observing and analyzing the effect of multiple independent variables on the dependent variable, through the addition of possible explanatory coefficients. Usually a computer software is used to assist in determining the regression coefficients. For a closer look on the mathematical background of the different regression methods, in context with parametric cost modeling it is referred to the parametric cost estimating handbook from the US department of defense [Bru96]. 2.3.2.5 Testing the Relationship Results After the determination of a CER through regression analysis, it is crucial to evaluate and test the regression results. Therefore, it is necessary to have a look on more than just one criteria [Chu08]. Only the consideration of a multitude of factors will give the whole picture of the quality of the CER. Table 2.3 summarizes the key criteria that should be evaluated when reviewing the quality of a CER. As for the regression analysis, a computer software is widely used to conduct a quick and reliable determination of the statistical criteria. For further information on the theory of probability and statistics, it is referred to the statistics ebook from the UCLA [UCL].

2.3 Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost

31

Symbol X,Y

Description data observation

Reference Check data range, number of data points and especially outliers measure for the strength of the relationship measure for the contribution of additional explanatory coefficients measures the accuracy of the relationship measure for the significance of the hypothesis measure for the validity of adding a particular cost driver variable

Evaluation/Test are there enough data points for a representative CER? can the outliers be explained or corrected? ranges from 0-1, while 1 as the maximum represents the best overall fit of the model to the data similar to R2 , however it only increases if an added explanatory coefficient considerably improves the model check if the actual mean deviation of the data points to the model is acceptable the lower the p-value, the more significant is the hypothesis, a hypothesis is generally rejected when the p-value is higher than the significance level α, which is often equal to 0.05 generally, a t-ratio above 2 leads to the acceptance of the hypothesis, that a cost term adds predictive value to the CER

R2

coefficient of determination R2 adjusted for degrees of freedom root mean square error

R2 adj

RM SE

p

probability value

t

t-ratio

Table 2.3: Criteria for the evaluation of regression results

3 Development of Cost Estimating Relationships
The purpose of this chapter is to document the process of developing the cost estimating relationships needed for the engine maintenance model. The objective is to generate cost-to-noncost CERs for the two dependent variables: • Shop Visit Cost per Flight Hour • Shop Visit Interval The development procedure follows the methodological approach described in the previous chapter under 2.3.2. This approach is not a fixed single sequence of steps to be conducted. Rather, it is as an iteration loop as illustrated in figure 2.16 on page 28. The outcome of each step is evaluated to determine if the next step can follow or if one has to go back a few stages to start all over again.

3.1 Database Assembly
As mentioned before, the database (DB) assembly is crucial for the success in developing CERs. Therefore, most time was spent on collecting and processing the data. The following describes the proposal of the hypothesis as a starting point for the data collection. Subsequently, different data sources are reviewed and the process of data normalization is reported.

3.1.1 Establishing the Hypothesis
As a result of the literature review, the technical background regarding aircraft engine maintenance has been worked out. From this information, the cost estimating hypothesis can be derived. Both cost and interval length are heavily influenced by operating parameters, such as average flight time, derate, OAT and environmental conditions. However these parameters are no independent variables that can be directly allocated to the engine built. Since these operational parameters still have a great impact on the dependent variables, they are subjected to a normalization of the collected data. Another influence factor is the thrust rating of an engine. The thrust rating can be represented by its thrust-weight ratio (TWR) . The weight1 reflects the constant built of an engine model. The more thrust2 is generated from the hardware, the higher the TWR, which leads to higher shop visit rate and also higher cost within one engine model range. The assumption is made that the TWR can also serve as variable to compare the thrust ratings of two

1 2

within the framework of this study, the “weight” as engine specification always means the dry weight “thrust” as engine specification always refers to the take-off thrust

32

3.1 Database Assembly

33

different engine models. Therefore, the TWR is introduced as first independent variable. From the DOC methods, it can be derived that the engine take-off thrust TT O is also an important cost driver. In addition, it is assumed that the engine weight as general measure for the engine size is directly related particularly to the engine maintenance costs. Table 3.1 sums up these three independent variables and the corresponding proposed relationships.
Summary of CER Hypothesis TWR Take-off Thrust Dry Weight higher TWR ⇒ higher SVR and cost higher thrust ⇒ higher cost higher weight ⇒ higher cost

Table 3.1: Summary of cost estimating relationship hypothesis

3.1.2 Review of Data Sources
With the hypothesis established, available data sources are reviewed to find the necessary data for the proposed relationships. The review of the data sources is separated into technical- and cost data sources. 3.1.2.1 Technical Data Standard technical specifications of aircraft engines, like take-off thrust and dry weight, are generally no sensitive data. Hence, they can be be obtained directly from the engine OEMs (website or specification sheets). This is a primary source and it can be considered as very reliable. It is also possible to find engine specifications in public databases. This has the advantage that the data for a wide range of engine models and variants is concentrated in one single source. Two such single sources are the Database Handbook for Turbofan and Turbojet Engines from Élodie Roux [Rou07] and the Jet Engine Specification Database from Nathan Meier [Mei05]. Even though these databases are strictly speaking no primary sources, it can be assumed that the data is still reliable, since it is simply a summary of the primary source without any deviation. This assumption was also confirmed by a few random comparison checks. Both sources provide a huge database for a wide range of engine models and variants and their specifications, including specifications beyond the engine dry weight and take-off thrust. 3.1.2.2 Cost and Interval Data In contrast to technical engine data, cost and removal interval information are highly sensitive and well protected by the MRO providers and airlines. Hence, it was not possible to make primary sources accessible. However, there is a range of secondary data sources, that were available in the framework of this study. These sources are briefly described in the following paragraphs:

3.1 Database Assembly

34

Form 41 Databases The US department of transportation1 maintains databases for aircraft traffic, capacity data and other operational data for air carriers operating to and from the United States. The database includes monthly data of engine maintenance containing labour, repair and material costs. However, all costs are given only for the different aircraft models. There is no indication of the engine model version. Therefore, this database is not adequate for collecting data for specific engine models and variants [Bec09]. MRO Prospector Aviation Week is a weekly magazine reporting on the aerospace industry. Part

of their portfolio is the MRO Prospector2 , a online database for fleet data and contract details. In contrast to the Form 41 database, it provides comprehensive tables with cost data for a wide range of specific engine models. The problem is that, there is no indication of the engine variant. However, the thrust rating of one engine model can vary considerably. Since thrust and TWR are key independent variables, it is necessary to have more detailed maintenance cost information on engine variant level. Furthermore, there are no informations given about the operational conditions the data is based. Aircraft Commerce Archive Aircraft Commerce3 is an aviation magazine published every two months. It provides intelligence on fleet planning, maintenance costs and aircraft leasing for the commercial aircraft industry. In regular intervals, it publishes detailed operator & owner guides dedicated to specific engine models. These articles give comprehensive information about the engine’s shop visit planning, removal causes, hardware degradation, LLP management and the influence of the operational severity. They also summarize data about shop visit intervals and costs in clearly represented tables. In appendix B.1 an example table from the magazine is illustrated. Usually, there are distinct information about each variant within an engine model range. The maintenance costs are generally expressed in estimated reserves per EFH or EFC, in which the reserves are distinguished between restoration reserves and LLP reserves. It is also indicated how the reserves change as the engine ages, by showing distinct reserves for first, second and third or mature shop visits. The articles are fairly consistent in their structure throughout the years. The magazine maintains an online archive with articles of the past ten years. This enables to collect and summarize the data. The aircraft commerce archive is clearly the best available source for building up the database, since it provides information for specific engine variants including indications about the operating conditions. The disadvantage is that all the articles have to be collected and particularly read in order to get all necessary information. Another issue is the fact that it is mainly unknown how exactly the data was collected and the reserves estimates were established. On request, the editorial office of the magazine stated, that the data is gained directly from maintenance facilities. Also, it was possible to clarify further questions about the data collection through

1 2 3

http://www.bts.gov/data_and_statistics/ http://mrop.aviationweek.com/ http://www.aircraft-commerce.com/

3.1 Database Assembly

35

direct correspondence with the editorial staff of Aircraft Commerce. Therefore, it is considered an adequate secondary source for the database assembly. AeroStrategy AeroStrategy1 is an aerospace consulting firm providing strategic consulting services to aerospace clients. Amongst others it provides market estimates on engine SV intervals and SV restoration costs. Costs for LLPs are unfortunately not included. The respective data tables are not to be disclosed in public. Therefore, they are not displayed in the framework of this study. The AeroStrategy data distinguishes between first and mature removals and it also shows distinct estimates on certain engine variants depending on the aircraft they are equipped to. Even though it is not clearly stated what flight conditions the estimates are based on, the information on which aircraft the engines are applied to enables assumptions on the average flight time the estimation relates to. In sum, the AeroStrategy data tables are less appropriate for the database assembly. However, they form an adequate independent data source for testing the plausibility of the targeted model.

3.1.3 Data Collection
The collection of the raw data was done in one single excel table. The cost and interval data from the Aircraft Commerce Articles (ACA) was collected first, since it is only available for certain engine models and variants. This data was separated in first-run and mature-run data. Thus, it was assumed that each engine reaches maturity after the first shop visit. This is a valid assumption, since the available data indicated that the cost and intervals reached a fairly steady level already after the first removal. For each engine it was noted what year and month the respective articles were published. This is necessary for a subsequent normalization of inflation. In addition, the average flight time, on which the cost and interval estimation of the engines is based on, was collected. This made it possible to collect the interval data as both, EFC and EFH with the average flight time as conversion factor. Direct information about the environmental conditions and the derate could not be extracted. However, from studying the articles, the assumption was made that the average standard derate for estimating the cost and interval data equals 10 %. Since the articles also provide detailed information about the LLP management and the EGT degradation rates of the engines it was considered to collect this data as well. The idea was that especially the LLP cost, LLP lives and number of LLPs in an engine may have a detectable relationship with the dependent variables. However, it turned out that the articles do not report this information consistently. As a result of this, the focus laid on the collection of the cost and interval data. The LLP reserves were generally collected in USD/EFC, whereas the restoration reserves were collected in USD/EFH. After the collection of the data from the ACA, the rows were filled up with the respective engine specifications. The collection of the technical data was extended to additionally include available engine specifications like pressure ratio, BPR, fan diameter, engine length and the number of stages in each turbine and compressor.

1

http://www.aerostrategy.com/

3.1 Database Assembly

36

The objective was to determine if one of these additional independent variables can significantly contribute to the CER development. Table 3.2 displays the basic structure of the colltected raw data table.
Engine Specifiations
Thrust [lbf] . . Weight [lb] . . EFC:EFH [h] . . ... . . Interval [EFC] . .

First Removal
Interval [EFH] . . Restoration Reserves . . LLP Reserves . . Interval [EFC] . .

Mature Removal
Interval [EFH] . . Restoration Reserves . . LLP Reserves . .

Table 3.2: Structure of the collected Data

From the previous chapter, it is known that engines designed for short-haul (SH) aircraft have different maintenance characteristics than medium-long-haul (MLH) operating engines. Because of this, the DB has been arranged in a way that both engine types are listed in separate groups. This enables both the combined and separate analysis of the two engine types. Appendix B.2 explains what considerations led to the classification of the database engines into SH and MLH.

3.1.4 Data Normalization
General data inconsistencies caused by the varying presentation of the information in the ACA were adjusted simultaneously with the collection of the data. However, adjustments of the data for instance due, to inflation and operational severity have to be done subsequently to the data collection. 3.1.4.1 Inflation The reviewed ACA were published over a time span of eight years, which makes fluctuating labour rates and material prices an issue when comparing cost data. Thus, the cost data is normalized by adjusting it through inflation factors. In general, material and repair & replacement costs tend to exhibit a higher price fluctuation. This is mainly because of the increasing application of more advanced and expensive materials and the generally greater imbalances in supply and demand for these materials. To account for this, two separate economic indices correlating to both labour and material are utilized to determine the overall inflation factor for each engine. These indices are the Employment Cost Index (ECI) for aircraft manufacturing wages & salaries and the Producer Price Index (PPI) for industrial commodities. The proportion of total engine maintenance costs is in the order of 35% labour and 65% material [Ack10]. The escalation year and month were set to May 2010. The economic indices for the escalation month and the respective base month of the engine data were obtained from the website of the US Bureau of Labor Statistics1 (BLS) . The method used to calcualte the maintenance inflation factor (MIF) is expressed in the following formula:

1

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgate

3.1 Database Assembly

37

M IF = 0.35 ·

ECIesc P P Iesc + 0.65 · ECIbase P P Ibase

ECIesc = mean ECI of the 3 months prior to escalation month ECIbase = mean ECI of the 3 months prior to base month of collected engine cost data P P Iesc = mean PPI of the 3 months prior to escalation month P P Ibase = mean PPI of the 3 months prior to base month of collected engine cost data

To balance short term fluctuation, each index is averaged over the three months prior to the actual month. For each engine of the DB, the corresponding MIF was calculated and the LLP cost and restoration costs were adjusted accordingly. 3.1.4.2 Flight Time As discussed in 2.2.3.2, both the shop visit DMC and the SVR/mean TOW are influenced by the average flight time. This effect has to be normalized, if possible. The database contains the average flight time for all cost and interval estimates. The objective is to normalize this data to a standard flight time level. Theoretically, this is possible if for each engine of the DB the corresponding severity curve was available (see figure 2.14). In this case, one could predefine a standard flight time and calculate for all data points the severity factor that would adjust the cost and interval data to the level of the standard flight time. The problem is that, each engine model and even each engine variant has a distinct severity curve. These curves are sensitive information that could not be obtained from the engine manufacturers. However, it was possible to get an example curve for a short-haul operating engine (A320) as well as for a medium-long-haul aircraft engine (Boeing 777). Together with the scattered information on severity factors from the ACA, it was succeeded in assembling averaged severity curves for both SH engines and for MLH engines, based on the two example curves. The assumption is made that the entire range of distinct SH severity curves can be adequately approximated by one averaged severity curve. It is assumed that the same applies for the group of MLH aircraft engines. This is an assumption made by the author of this thesis. It results from general observations made while studying the aircraft commerce archive. The two determined average severity curves are subsequently displayed in shape of a table for a derate of 10%.
EFH:EFC Severity Factor 0.5 2.40 1.0 1.75 1.5 1.30 1.9 1.00 2.5 0.86 3.0 0.78 4.0 0.706 5.0 0.66 6.0 0.63

Table 3.3: Determined average SH severity curve for a derate of 10%
EFH:EFC Severity Factor 1.0 2.20 2.0 1.70 3.0 1.40 4.0 1.23 5.0 1.08 6.0 1.00 7.0 0.93 8.0 0.88 9.0 0.86 10.0 0.84 11.0 0.82 12.0 0.80

Table 3.4: Determined average MLH severity curve for a derate of 10%

Since the LLP replacement is mainly independent from the operational severity and the LLP

3.1 Database Assembly

38

reserves were collected in USD/EFC, they were excluded from the flight time normalization. Therefore, only the restoration cost reserves and removal intervals of the database were adjusted with these severity factors. Both engine categories have been escalated to the base flight time of the respective average severity curve (Severity Factor = 1.0). That means the SH engines were normalized to a flight time of 1.9, whereas the MLH engines were normalized to a flight time of 6.0. 3.1.4.3 LLP Reserves The deviation of the LLP reserves between the first shop visit and subsequent ones is minor. In addition, there is no trend detectable. Therefore, the LLP reserves of all available data have been averaged for each engine. This average LLP reserves serve as basis for the cost analysis. That means the LLP reserves are not divided into first-run and mature-run data. 3.1.4.4 Remaining Anomalies According to the previous chapter, there are several other effects which have a significant impact on the maintenance cost and the time on-wing. Ideally, these effects would be also normalized to a standard level. The following summarizes these effects and discusses how they were considered while assembling the database. Derate The ACA do not clearly state on what derate the estimates are based on. However, there are often information about the average derate the engines are operated with. Most engines operate on average with a derate of 10%. Thus, it is assumed that all estimations were based on this derate. Therefore an adjustment of the data according to the derate level does not apply. Environment and OAT Since the information about the environment and the OAT are very scarce, it was not possible to utilize this as foundation for a data normalization. In general, the estimates reflect a worldwide average and thus it is assumed that all values were established based on a temperate environment (TE) . Engine Age The effects of the engine age are already included in the database. The aircraft

commerce guides publish estimated cost reserves and intervals for first and mature shop visits. This data is represented separately in the database. Therefore it is possible to do a distinct analysis of first SVs and mature SVs. As mentioned before, this is based on the assumption that the engines reach maturity in terms of maintenance after the first shop visit. This may vary especially for engines that have only a few shop visits during their life cycle. However, for these engines, it is also applicable that the first interval is at most times considerably longer than subsequent ones. Improving Technology and Learning Curve When building up a database from historic data, it is

also an issue to consider effects from improved technology and developing know-how. Over the

3.1 Database Assembly

39

past two decades, the trend in engine maintenance went to longer intervals and thus reduced maintenance costs per EFH. This was a result of improvements throughout the maintenance process such as better materials, ECM, on-wing repairs and also design for durability. These effects were clearly visible in the reviewed data sources. However, it was not possible to collect enough data from older engine models for establishing reliable escalation factors. Therefore, the database only contains maintenance data for newer generation engine designs based on similar technology1 . However, neither does the DB contain engines from the latest generation, since most of these engines have not even been through their first shop visit and thus there is no historic maintenance data available. For normalizing learning curve effects, it applies the same as for the technology improvement. For a few engines, there is data accessible indicating that an early engine built has raised SVRs and costs compared to later revisions of the same engine model. This is due to improvements in both design and maintenance as the engine model is in service. However, since available information was limited, a normalization could not be performed. In order to make sure that these two effects do not influence the data analysis, data of older engine generations and data from newly marketed engines was marked and excluded from the general data analysis. However, the existing data can be utilized as input for a determination of technology factors for the maintenance model. Number of Spools In section 2.1.2, it was discussed that the spool configuration of an engine

influences the achievable shop visit intervals. The database contains only six engines with a three-spool configuration, all from the same OEM. As with the learning curve and the improving technology, it was not possible to collect enough information to adjust the intervals to the level of two spool engines. However, the accessible data confirmed this effect. Therefore, the three-shaft engines were also marked and excluded in the interval analysis.

3.1.5 Summary
A lot of findings and decisions made while assembling the database were the result of first data analysis procedures, which were necessary to evaluate the adequacy of the DB. This process is not reported into detail, in order to keep this documentation clearly presented. The result of the database assembly is the foundation for the subsequent extensive data analysis. However, one has to keep in mind that the collected data is based on only one single secondary external source. As a result of the inconsistency of the presentation of the shop visit data in the ACA and the fact that the exact manner the data was collected is unknown, a lot of assumptions had to be made to fit the data to the defined database structure. The DB is divided column by column in engine specifications, first-run, mature-run and normalized intervals and cost reserves. The rows are furthermore split after the engine type. Short-haul and medium-long-haul operating engines are represented separately. The same applies for three-spool engines and older generation engines. Noteworthy is also that some engine variants appear repeatedly with varying average flight times.

1

most engines of the DB entered the market between 1990-2000

3.2 Data Analysis

40

In appendix B.3, the assembled database is displayed with reduced number of columns. Since several influential effects have been normalized during the DB assembly, it is important to report the conditions the final DB is based on. Table 3.5 sums up these base conditions for short-haul and medium-long-haul engines.
Parameter EFH:EFC Derate No.Spools Environm. SH 1.9 10% 2 TE MLH 6.0 10% 2 TE

Table 3.5: Summary of DB base conditions

3.2 Data Analysis
The data analysis is divided into determination of candidate relationships and regression analysis of the found relationships. Both stages were aided by the extensive use of statistical computer software1 . The dependent variables shop visit interval and shop visit cost per EFH were
Shop Visit Interval 1 2 First Interval Mature Interval 3 First Restoration Reserves Shop Visit Cost 4 Mature Restoration Reserves 5 LLP Reserves

Table 3.6: Summary of the preliminary dependent variables to be analyzed

split according to the structure of the database. The SV intervals consist of intervals for firstand mature removals, while the SV costs consist of restoration reserves for first- and mature removals and average LLP reserves for all removals. A further differentiation according to the engine type is also evaluated. As seen in table 3.6, the minimum number of CERs is therefore five.

3.2.1 Candidate Relationship Screening
The first step is to determine candidate relationships. This includes the evaluation of a possible further separation of the dependent variables. The procedure was to do a database screening for all five dependent variables (see table 3.6). The applied statistic software provides a screening function, that assists in finding independent variables that significantly contribute to modeling the analyzed dependent variable. This enables an interpretation of the proposed CERs from the hypothesis simultaneously to an analysis of the additional engine specifications. Figure illustrates the results of such a data screening.

1

JMP 8.0 from SAS

Short_cost_Analysis- Screening of 3rd cost adj 2

Pag

3.2 Data Analysis 3rd cost adj Screening for

41

Contrasts
Term thrust HPC Stages BPR OPR length weight LPC Stages Airflow SFC thrust*thrust thrust*HPC Stages HPC Stages*HPC Stages thrust*BPR HPC Stages*BPR BPR*BPR thrust*OPR HPC Stages*OPR BPR*OPR OPR*OPR Contrast 78,6617 -7,4830 -9,4701 -13,2651 5,5572 -7,9594 -6,2270 -1,0819 -0,6221 4,2789 -0,1146 4,0165 -1,2031 -0,8808 0,4734 1,0578 -1,2074 -0,8278 -3,4446 Lenth t-Ratio 43,43 -4,13 -5,23 -7,32 3,07 -4,39 -3,44 -0,60 -0,34 2,36 -0,06 2,22 -0,66 -0,49 0,26 0,58 -0,67 -0,46 -1,90 Individual p-Value <,0001* 0,0043* 0,0015* 0,0004* 0,0169* 0,0032* 0,0110* 0,5760 0,7512 0,0341* 0,9522 0,0428* 0,5332 0,6505 0,8099 0,5839 0,5315 0,6706 0,0719 Simultaneous p-Value <,0001* 0,0506 0,0192* 0,0035* 0,1589 0,0386* 0,1016 1,0000 1,0000 0,3368 1,0000 0,4114 1,0000 1,0000 1,0000 1,0000 1,0000 1,0000 0,6043

* * * * * * * * * *

Half Normal Plot
90

Figure 3.1: JMP screening function

80 thrust For each of the independent variables, the respective t-ratio’s and p-values are displayed. Absolute Contrast

This is a first hint of what independent variable could contribute to the model of the analyzed dependent variable. In conjunction with the screening, there is the possibility to conduct a
50 60

70

quick regression analysis with the highlighted variables as input. This first regression analysis 40 enables an evaluation of the capability of certain variable combinations to model the dependent 30 variable. 20 result of this initial screening was, that all additional engine specifications do not The
BPR provide any valuable contributionweight modeling the CERs. Another important result was, that to 10 HPC Stages LPC length Stages OPR

0 the interval analysis turned out to be more complicated. It was not possible to find acceptable -10 regression results for an interval analysis of the entire engine range of the database. Therefore, 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5

thrust*thrust HPC Stages*HPC Stages OPR*OPR

the separation of the databaseNormal Quantile Half in SH and MLH engines was utilized. The shop visit intervals were further divided in first and mature-run intervals for SH engines and MLH engines. While the Lenth PSE=1,81115
Asterisked terms were forced orthogonal. Analysis is engines with three spool configuration were order dependent. the interval analysis, they turned out excluded from P-Values derived from a simulation of 10000 Lenth t ratios.

to beMake Model the Model analysis. Older generation engines or engine data from newly marketed eligible for Run cost engines have been excluded entirely from the data analysis. The initial screening confirmed the assumption that this data could not be modeled adequately together with the remainder data points. As visible on figure 3.1, the software also automatically evaluates the significance of variable combinations. This is an useful function, since it is hard to predict how such variable combination could contribute to the model.
1 Short-Haul First Interval Shop Visit Interval 2 3 Medium-LongShort-Haul Haul First Mature Interval Interval 4 Medium-LongHaul Mature Interval 5 First Restoration Reserves Shop Visit Cost 6 7 Mature Restoration LLP Reserves Reserves

Table 3.7: Summary of the final dependent variables to be analyzed

Table 3.7 summarizes the seven dependent variables for which the respective cost estimating relationships are developed in the following section.

3.2 Data Analysis

42

3.2.2 Regression Analysis
With all CERs established, the next step was to find the best fit of valid combinations of independent variables to the analyzed dependent variable. This stage was also conducted through applying the JMP 8.0 software. The software does the statistical data analysis independently. That means it determines for a predefined set of independent variables the prediction function that results in the best least square fit to the analyzed dependent variable. Promising sets of independent variables can be derived from the data screening. The best combination of variables was then simply determined by evaluating and comparing the regression results of different variable sets. An example output of the regression results established by the used computer software is shown in figure 3.2. From the initial data screening, the possible independent variables have been narrowedLeast Squares main engine specifications: take-off thrust and dry weight as LLP- Fit down to the well as the ratio of both. This Reserves the process of finding the combinations that result in Response LLP simplified the best overall fit. Whole Model
Actual by Predicted Plot
900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 100 300 500 700 900 LLP Reserves Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0,95 RMSE=44,13

Summary of Fit
RSquare RSquare Adj Root Mean Square Error Mean of Response Observations (or Sum Wgts) 0,952884 0,950528 44,13013 254,4868 64

Analysis of Variance
Source Model Error C. Total DF 3 60 63 Sum of Squares Mean Square 2363135,5 787712 116848,1 1947 2479983,6 F Ratio 404,4799 Prob > F <,0001*

Parameter Estimates
Term Intercept weight thrust (weight-8608,78)*(weight-8608,78) Estimate -115,3133 0,0194512 0,0031206 2,6924e-6 Std Error 13,6202 0,007095 0,001069 3,188e-7 t Ratio -8,47 2,74 2,92 8,44 Prob>|t| <,0001* 0,0080* 0,0049* <,0001*

Residual by Predicted Plot Figure 3.2: JMP regression results example output
250 200 LLP Reserves Residual 150 100 50 0 -50 -100 -150 0 100 300 500 700 900

LLP Reserves Actual

3.3 Results of the Parametric Cost Modeling

43

3.3 Results of the Parametric Cost Modeling
This sections sums up the results in shape of the determined prediction functions separated in interval and cost CERs. The developed CERs have at most three different components as input. This also includes combinations of the three remaining independent variables: thrust, weight and T W R. The units of measurement of these independent variables were adopted from the database. Their definition is summarized in table 3.8. A regression summary as illustrated in figure 3.2 for each of the seven CERs is displayed in appendix C.
Input thrust weight TWR Symbol lbf lb
lbf lb

Unit pound-force pound pound-force per pound

Table 3.8: Defined standard units for the input parameters of the CERs

3.3.1 Shop Visit Interval CERs
As previously established, the SV interval as a major dependent variable was divided in four sub-variables, in order to account for occurring anomalies in the database. The corresponding CERs are subsequently summarized. From the hypothesis, it was expected that the interval length mainly depends on the TWR of an engine. This was not confirmed by all four developed CERs. The first intervals of both, SH and MLH engines are only marginally under the direct influence of the TWR. However, these two CERs also heavily depend on the input of both, the engine thrust and the engine weight, so that the hypothesis is still represented. The development of the interval CERs was based on intervals given in EFH, thus the output of the following CERs is also defined in EFH as standard interval measurement unit. 3.3.1.1 First Interval for SH-Engines The first removal intervals for short-haul operating engines can be expressed as a function of T W R, weight and weight2 : Interval F R,SH = 68466 − 8267.81904 · T W R − 1.00444 · weight + (weight − 5407) · [(weight − 5407) · 0.00012125] 3.3.1.2 Mature Interval for SH-Engines For mature removal intervals the regression analysis showed that the CER is just a function of the thrust-weight ratio (T W R): Interval M R,SH = 40684 − 5022.8116 · T W R (3.2) (3.1)

3.3 Results of the Parametric Cost Modeling

44

3.3.1.3 First Interval for MLH-Engines The determined CER for the first removal interval of medium-long-haul operating engines includes the dependent variables weight, thrust and weight2 : Interval F R,M LH = 22539 + 1.4329 · weight − 0.3147 · thrust + (thrust − 76305) · [(thrust − 76305) · 0.0000034421] 3.3.1.4 Mature Interval for MLH-Engines Mature intervals for medium-long-haul operating engines are, similar to equation (3.1) reflected as a function of T W R, weight and weight2 : Interval M R,M LH = 34415 − 2759.25322 · T W R − 0.36625 · weight + (weight − 12072) · [(weight − 12072) · 0.000101795] (3.4) (3.3)

3.3.2 Shop Visit Cost CERs
As a result of the data source structure, the shop visit costs as second major dependent variable, have been divided into restoration cost and LLP cost. Since the LLP reserves in the database are represented in USD/EFC, the LLP CER generates LLP costs given in USD/EFC. The LLP costs turned out to be fairly stable as the engine ages. Therefore, only the restoration costs have been furthermore divided in first-run and mature-run costs. The restoration cost CERs were developed based on shop visit restoration costs given in USD/EFH. Hence, the output of the restoration costs CERs is also defined in USD/EFH. The developed CERs largely reflect the predictions resulting from the hypothesis. The three corresponding CERs are presented in the following. 3.3.2.1 First-Run Restoration Costs The restoration cost per EFH for first shop visits have been modeled as a function of the thrust. This CER is valid for the entire range of engines: SV RC F R, EF H = 7 + 0.002361887 · thrust 3.3.2.2 Mature-Run Restoration Costs The mature shop visit restoration cost were also modeled with the thrust as only input component: SV RC M R, EF H = 46 + 0.002886118 · thrust (3.6) (3.5)

3.3 Results of the Parametric Cost Modeling

45

3.3.2.3 LLP Costs Eventually the CER estimating the LLP costs of all engines of the database is a function of weight, thrust and weight2 : LLP Cost = − 115 + 0.0194512 · weight + 0.0031206 · thrust + (weight − 8608.78125) · [(weight − 8608.78125) · 2.69234 · 10−6 ] (3.7)

4 Modeling of Engine Maintenance Cost
As mentioned earlier, the foundation of a cost estimating model is the cost breakdown, that includes all relevant costs. The cost breakdown structure from the perspective of this study has been established in figure 2.15 on page 25. Since the engine line maintenance is already included in the existing LLC-Tool, the focus here lies on modeling the shop visit costs. Maintenance costs are normally divided in direct and indirect costs. Therefore, the SV costs can be further differentiated in SV DMC and SV IMC. Since the collected data reflects calculated prices from MRO providers, it is assumed that charges for maintenance burden are already included in the collected cost data. However, the costs for maintaining a spare engine pool or leasing spare engines for the duration of a shop visit are generally not included. Therefore, spare engine costs as part of the indirect maintenance costs are considered separately. The objective is to develop a qualitative maintenance cost model that focuses on estimating the shop visit DMC and intervals. Charges for spare engines are optionally added based on average leasing rates. The assembled database and the resulting cost estimating relationships developed in the previous chapter, predetermine parts of the DMC model structure. However, since the CERs are based on a normalized database, they do not reflect the impact of major influence factors such as, flight time, derate, number of spools or environment. These effects have to be modeled subsequent to the CERs. This chapter summarizes the considerations that led to the final cost estimating model structure.

4.1 Model Structure
The first step in establishing the model structure is to determine what the input and what the output parameters are. The objective of the engine maintenance model is to estimate SV intervals and SV costs. The developed CERs distinguish between first-run and mature-run shop visits. Thus, there are four output parameters: SV interval and SV costs for each engine phase. The input parameters depend first of all on the necessary input for the developed CERs. These parameters are, the engine thrust and the engine weight. Since the interval CERs are further divided in short-haul and medium/long-haul engines, an additional input parameter that determines what CER is applied, has to be introduced. This additional parameter was termed engine application and is considered as an engine specification, since it is a static parameter linked to the engine variant. All of these input parameters can be derived from the developed CERs. However, as mentioned above, there are important effects that are not modeled in the CERs. Therefore, there are more necessary input parameters. These include the number of engine spools as well as operational factors like flight time, derate and information about the

46

4.1 Model Structure

47

severity of the environment.
Engine Specifications

Weight Thrust No. Spools Application

SV Interval FR Removal Interval MR Removal Interval

Engine Utilization

AC Engine Maintenance Cost Model

SV Costs FR Shop Visit Cost MR Shop Visit Cost

EFH:EFC Derate Environment

*FR: First-Run *MR: Mature-Run

Figure 4.1: Black box of maintenance model

Figure 4.1 illustrates the maintenance model as black box with a summary of all input and output parameters. With the model input and output established, the inner structure of the black box can be generated. In order to match the output parameters, the model contains in general two separate lines: a cost-line and an interval-line. The results of the CERs are normalized values for costs and intervals, based on the engine’s weight and thrust. Thus, they do not model any operational severity effects. These effects are modeled in conjunction with the normalized
Folie 3 values from the CERs. Therefore, the inner structure of the model has been split into two serial

modules. The first module reflects the developed CERs, while the second represents all additional effects influencing the shop visit costs and intervals. The two modules are thus termed as follows: • CER-Module • Effect-Module The CER-Module determines normalized base values for the shop visit costs and intervals. These base values are then adjusted in the Effect-Module with a series of adjustment factors. The adjustment factors are determined in correspondence to the respective input parameters. The entire model structure is illustrated in figure 4.2. The two modules are described in some more detail in the following subsections.

Vortrag > Autor > Dokumentname > Datum

4.1 Model Structure

48

CERCER-Module
Base Shop Visit Cost
Restoration Cost LLP Cost Func. FR Cost Func. MR Cost Func.
MR Interval Func. SMHE MR Interval Func. MLHE

Base Shop Visit Interval
ShortShort-Medium Haul FR Interval Func. SMHE MediumMedium-Long Haul FR Interval Func. MLHE

FR Rest.Cost [$/EFH] LLP Cost [$/EFC] MR Rest.Cost [$/EFH]

FR Base Interval [EFH] MR Base Interval [EFH]

EffectEffect-Module
Time&Material Factor Three-Spool Factor

EFC:EFH Ratio

Severity Factor

Environment Factor

FR Cost [$/EFH] MR Cost [$/EFH]

FR Interval [EFH] MR Interval [EFH]

Figure 4.2: Inner structure of the cost estimating model

4.1.1 CER-Module
The CER-Module basically comprises of nothing more than the seven CERs developed in the previous chapter (see blue frames in figure 4.2). With the input of the engine weight and thrust plus the information if it is a SH or MLH engine, the CER-Module generates five outputs:
Folie 2

• LLP Costs [USD/EFC] • FR Restoration Costs [USD/EFH] • MR Restoration Costs [USD/EFH] • FR Base Interval [EFH] • MR Base Interval [EFH]

Vortrag > Autor > Dokumentname > Datum

These base outputs are valid only for the normalized conditions on which the CER development was based (see table 3.5). The adjustment to the operational severity is performed in the following effect-module. For this adjustment, the determined shop visit intervals as output of the interval CERs have to be converted into a shop visit rate (SVR). In this instance, the SV interval and the SVC are represented in analogue measurements (both relating to [1/EFH]). This enables the adjustment of both values with the same factors.

4.1 Model Structure

49

4.1.2 Effect-Module
The Effect-Module, generates the factors necessary to adjust the base costs and intervals from the CERs according to the input of the operational severity and the number of engine spools. There are five factors (red frames in figure 4.2), which are subsequently discussed. The output of the effect-module are adjusted SV intervals and SVC per EFH divided in first-run and mature-run shop visits. Since the effect-module merges the LLP costs and the restoration costs from the CER-module, it generates four outputs: • FR Shop Visit Costs [USD/EFH] • MR Shop Visit Costs [USD/EFH] • FR Shop Visit Interval [EFH] • MR Shop Visit Interval [EFH] With this output, the absolute shop visit costs can be calculated through multiplying the SVC per EFH with the respective SV interval. 4.1.2.1 Severity Factor The concept of severity factors extracted from severity curves has been introduced in 2.2.3. Severity factors adjusts restoration costs and shop visit intervals corresponding to the average flight time and derate under which the engine was operated. It was not possible to obtain the severity curve of each engine in the DB. Therefore, two average severity curves that approximate the severity curves of a range of engines, have been developed (see 3.1.4.2). These average curves were already applied to normalize the flight time of the DB engines (see tables 3.3 and 3.4). This normalization did not include an adjustment of the derate, since the DB entries were assumed to have a constant derate. However, the average severity curves were developed to also include multiple curves for each of the common derate levels. The two developed severity curves are fully illustrated in appendix D. These average curves are now the basis for modeling the effects of flight time and derate on the restoration costs and shop visit intervals as part of the effect-module. With the flight time and the derate as input, the severity curve simply gives out the corresponding severity factor which is then multiplied with the restoration costs and the interval (as seen in the example calculation on page 23). 4.1.2.2 Time & Material Factor The time & material factor (TMF) has been introduced to account for the effect, that the absolute shop visit restoration costs (SVRC) generally increase with increasing TOW. When the severity factor is applied alone, the absolute SVRC remain constant regardless of the flight time or derate. This is because the SF adjusts both the interval and the restoration costs per EFH simultaneously. However, the increased TOW due to raised derate and flight time should result in increasing SVRC. The time & material factor models this effect. Therefore, one could expect that the TMF can be expressed similar to the severity factor via multiple curves, only inverted

4.1 Model Structure

50

so that the factor increases with decreasing flight time and derate. Due to lack of data it was not achieved to develop such multiple curves. However, it was possible to obtain a single example curve from a contact person in the engine maintenance industry. This curve does not reflect the impact of the derate. Since the influence of the derate on the TOW is generally less severe and the accessible data is limited, the contribution of different derate levels was neglected. The available single curve was considered as basis for developing T&M curves valid for all derates. As with the severity curves, two curves have been developed. One for all SH engines and one for all MLH engines. The two curves are subsequently illustrated in shape of a table. A graphical illustration of the time & material curves can be found in appendix D.
EFH:EFC T&M Factor 0.5 0.90 1.0 0.95 1.5 0.98 1.9 1.00 2.5 1.02 3.0 1.03 4.0 1.04 5.0 1.05 6.0 1.06

Table 4.1: SH Engine Time & Material factor with respect to the flight time
EFH:EFC T&M Factor 1.0 0.85 2.0 0.91 3.0 0.94 4.0 0.96 5.0 0.98 6.0 1.00 7.0 1.03 8.0 1.05 9.0 1.07 10.0 1.09 11.0 1.10 12.0 1.11

Table 4.2: MLH Engine Time & Material factor with respect to the flight time

4.1.2.3 Three-Spool Factor The three-spool factor (TSF) models the extended TOW of engines with a three-spool configuration compared to the more common two-spool engines. In general, there was no detailed additional information on the impact of the three-spool configuration on the achievable SV intervals accessible. However, since the DB indicates that three-spool engines achieve significant longer SV intervals, the available data from the assembled DB was enabled to determine a simple constant factor that models this effect. This factor was determined through averaging the offset of the original three-spool data points over the generated intervals from the two-spool CERs with the respective three-spool engine specifications as input. However, it has to be noted that all three-spool engines of the DB are MLH engines. It is assumed that SH engine are influenced in a similar manner. The result of the analysis was the following offset factor: • TSF = 0.7 • TSF = 1.0 for three-spool engines for two-spool engines

In case the input indicates that the proposed engine is a three-spool engine, the SVRs generated from the interval CERs are simply multiplied with the TSF = 0.7 to account for the expected longer TOW of a three-spool configuration. The TSF simply equals 1.0, in case of a standard two-spool engine. For a qualitative consideration, this simple approach is sufficient to model the influence of the number of spools. 4.1.2.4 Environment Factor The environment factor (EF) reflects the impact of the present environmental conditions including the outside air temperature on engine maintenance. Studying the ACA indicated that the

4.1 Model Structure

51

environment influences the SV intervals and costs considerably. This was also confirmed through the correspondence with different professionals in the aircraft engine maintenance field. However, it was difficult to locate clear data on this topic. As guideline for modeling the environmental impact served a paper from Ackert [Ack10]. Ackert defines three gradual levels of environmental severity and relates each level to a certain escalation factor. These environment levels and their correlating EFs are listed in table 4.3. The respective EF is then multiplied with the overall SVR and SVRC in order to adjust the intervals and costs to the present environmental severity. Table 4.3 also indicates typical regions for each environment level.
Environment Temperate Hot/Dry Erosive EF 1.0 1.1 1.2 Typical Regions North America, Europe, Australia Middle East, North Africa Coastal China, SE Asia, India

Table 4.3: Environment factors for different environmental conditions

4.1.2.5 EFC:EFH Ratio Strictly speaking the EFC:EFH ratio is not a factor that is intended to model a certain influential effect on engine maintenance. The EFC:EFH ratio, as the reciprocal value of the flight time (EFH:EFC), translates costs represented in USD/EFC into USD/EFH. The effect module sums up the LLP costs and the restoration costs in order to obtain one measure for the overall shop visit costs per EFH. However, the LLP costs are generally given in USD/EFC, whereas the intervals and the restoration costs are based on EFH. Therefore, the LLP costs have to be converted into USD/EFH in order to enable the summation of LLP costs and restoration costs.

4.1.3 Spare Engine Charges
Aircraft engines that are removed and sent to the workshop are normally replaced with spare engines, in order to keep the aircraft in service while its original engines are overhauled. Costs incurred by either owning or leasing spare engines are generally considered as a cost driver in engine maintenance. Therefore, the targeted model is supposed to enable the consideration of spare engine charges. For a qualitative estimation model, it is not practical to model the expenditures for spare engines into detail. That would require comprehensive information on the airline’s engine fleet situation and access to spare engine pools as well as on current leasing market developments. However, in correspondence with one of the product managers of Lufthansa Technik1 , it was established that a reasonable estimation of spare engine costs can be achieved through current leasing rates. Leasing rates can vary between 2000-5000 USD/day. This deviation is not only related to the engine type, but it also heavily relates to the current supply and demand situation for the respective engine. Therefore, there were no CERs developed that reflect spare engine leasing rates. In the framework of this study, the spare engine costs are simply

1

http://www.lufthansa-technik.com

4.2 Example Application

52

estimated with a predefined leasing rate and the information of the duration of the shop visit. Current engine leasing rates are not sensitive information and can be obtained on request from engine lessors. In case there are no leasing rates accessible it is proposed to assume an average leasing rate of 3500 USD/day. A reasonable average shop visit duration is 80 days. Since the developed SV DMC model considers the workload of each shop visit as equal, this average of 80 days is established as standard shop visit duration. Therefore, the total spare engine costs (SEC) for an average shop visit yield to: SEC = LeasingRate · SV duration ≈ 3500 · 80 = 280,000 U SD (4.1)

If more detailed information is available, the two parameters of this simple approach can be adjusted at all times. The proposed values here give an idea of the dimension of the costs and will serve as default values of the model.

4.2 Example Application
This section illustrates the functionality of the cost estimating model through an example calculation that includes all equations necessary to generate the output of the model. The example is based on the following input parameters:
Engine Specifications Parameter Thrust [lbf] Weight [lb] No. Spools Application Input 79900 EFH:EFC [h] 14545 Derate 2 Environment MLH Temperate 10% 8.0 Engine Utilization Parameter Input

Table 4.4: Input engine specifications

Table 4.5: Input engine utilization

This input relates to a Pratt & Whitney 4077 operated on a long-haul route typical for a wide-body aircraft like the Boeing 777-200. With this input, the CER-module first determines the base intervals and costs, which are subsequently adjusted through a series of adjustment factors. Since the input parameters are already given in the required measurement unit, a conversion of the units does not apply.

4.2.1 Base Costs and Intervals from CERs
The PW 4077 is classified as MLH engine. Therefore, the equations (3.3) and (3.4) are applied to determine the base interval lengths:

4.2 Example Application

53

BaseInterval F R = 22539 + 1.4329 · 14545 − 0.3147 · 79900 +(79900 − 76305) · [(79900 − 76305) · 0.0000034421] = 18500 EF H BaseInterval M R = 34415 − 2759.25322 · 79900 − 0.36625 · 14545 14545 +(14545 − 12072) · [(14545 − 12072) · 0.000101795] = 14700 EF H The restoration cost for FR and MR shop visits are calculated using the eqs. (3.5) and (3.6): BaseSV RC F R, EF H = 7 + 0.002361887 · 79900 = 194 BaseSV RC M R, EF H = 46 + 0.002886118 · 79900 = 275 The LLP cost are eventually determined through equation (3.7): LLP Cost = −115 + 0.0194512 · 14545 + 0.0031206 · 79900 +(14545 − 8608.78125) · [(14545 − 8608.78125) · 2.69234 · 10−6 ] = 509 U SD EF C (4.6) U SD EF H U SD EF H (4.4) (4.2)

(4.3)

(4.5)

All intermediate results generated through the CERs are summarized in table 4.6.
Interval F R [EF H] 18500 Interval M R [EF H] 14700 SV RC F R, EF H 194
U SD EF H

SV RC M R, EF H 275

U SD EF H

LLP Cost 509

U SD EF C

Table 4.6: Summary of CER results for the example input parameters

4.2.2 Adjustment of Intervals
The adjustment factors of the effect-module are defined so that they relate to the elapsed EFH. Therefore, the determined intervals of the CERs have to be translated into SVRs. This enables an analogue application of the adjustment factors for both the SV intervals and SV restoration costs. With equation (2.1) the two determined intervals from (4.2) and (4.3) are converted to: BaseSV R F R = BaseSV R M R = 1000 1000 SV s = = 0.054 BaseInterval F R 18500 1000 EF H 1000 1000 SV s = = 0.068 BaseInterval M R 14700 1000 EF H (4.7) (4.8)

4.2 Example Application

54

In order to obtain the final SVR, the base SVRs are multiplied with the three-spool factor (TSF), the severity factor (SF) and the environment factor (EF) as illustrated in figure 4.2. SV R = BaseSV R · T SF · SF · EF (4.9)

The input indicates that both the TSF and EF equal 1.0, since the example engine has two spools and is operated in a temperate environment. The SF is obtained from the average severity curve for MLH engines (appendix D.2). For a flight time of 8.0 hours and a derate of 10% the severity factors yields to SF = 0.88. Therefore, the actual first-run and mature-run SVRs result in: SV R F R = 0.054 · 1.0 · 0.88 · 1.0 = 0.048 = 20800 EF H SV R M R = 0.068 · 1.0 · 0.88 · 1.0 = 0.060 = 16700 EF H (4.10) (4.11)

These final SVRs can be converted back into an interval expressed in EFH, as performed above. 4.2.2.1 Adjustment of Costs The total shop visit costs per EFH consist of LLP costs per EFH (LLP Cost EF H ) and the adjusted restoration costs (SV RC EF H ). SV C EF H = LLP Cost EF H + SV RC EF H (4.12)

The LLP costs are not adjusted by any effect factors. However, since the LLP costs are given in USD/EFC, they have to be converted into USD/EFH: LLP Cost EF H = LLP Cost · EF C 1 U SD = 509 · = 64 EF H 8.0 EF H (4.13)

The base restoration costs from eqs. (4.5) and (4.5) have to be multiplied with the time & material factor, the severity factor and the environment factor in order to get the final restoration costs. SV RC = BaseSV RC EF H · T M F · SF · EF (4.14)

The TMF is determined with the respective time & material curve for MLH engines (appendix D.3). With a flight time of 8.0, it yields to TMF = 1.05. The severity factor and environment factor are known from before. Thus, the FR and MR restoration costs result in: SV RC F R, EF H = 194 · 1.05 · 0.88 · 1.0 = 179 SV RC M R, EF H = 275 · 1.05 · 0.88 · 1.0 = 254 U SD EF H U SD EF H (4.15) (4.16)

With the results from the eqs. (4.15) and (4.15), the total shop visit cost per EFH are then calculated through eq. (4.12):

4.3 Model Plausibility

55

SV C F R, EF H = LLP Cost EF H + SV RC M R, EF H = 64 + 179 = 243 SV C M R, EF H = LLP Cost EF H + SV RC M R, EF H = 64 + 254 = 318

U SD EF H U SD EF H

(4.17) (4.18)

4.2.3 Final Results
Eventually the total shop visit costs can be calculated through the multiplication of the SVC per EFH and the respective shop visit interval or time on wing. SV C = SV C EF H · Interval SV C F R = SV C F R, EF H · Interval F R = 243 · 20800 = 5.1 mil U SD SV C M R = SV C M R, EF H · Interval M R = 318 · 16700 = 5.3 mil U SD (4.19) (4.20) (4.21)

The final output of the cost estimation are first-run and mature-run shop visit intervals and shop visit costs. The results for the proposed example are summarized in table 4.7.
Interval F R [EF H] 20800 Interval M R [EF H] 16700 SV C F R [U SD million] 5.1 SV C F R [U SD million] 5.3

Table 4.7: Final output for the example input parameters

4.3 Model Plausibility
The plausibility of the model was continuously monitored while developing the CERs and creating the model structure. This intermediate plausibility tests significantly contributed to the decisions made throughout the development process. This section illustrates the examination of the credibility of the final model. In general, it is important to avoid using the same data that was applied to develop the model for subsequent plausibility tests. It can be expected that the model reflects the collected data of the database. However, since the database has been normalized and the final model structure includes not only the developed CERs but also a series of adjustment factors, it is first analyzed how well the final model reflects the original data points, prior to the flight time normalization. Subsequently, the model results are compared to additional available data sources.

4.3.1 Model Results vs. Original Database
As indicated, it is established that the developed CERs reflect the normalized data points quite well (see regression results in appendix C). However, the objective of the following analysis is to illustrate how the combination of the different CERs and the subsequent effect-module reflect the original data before the flight time normalization. Therefore, each of the primary

4.3 Model Plausibility

56

output parameters of the model is plotted over the respective actual original data points from the database. Ideally, the resulting points would lead to a graph that equals the standard linear curve f (x) = x. In this case every predicted value would be equal to the respective actual value. This ideal linear curve is plotted as a blue dotted line. However, it can be expected that the plotted data points do not lie perfectly on this line. Furthermore it is possible that the ideal curve does not even represent the trend line of the data points. Therefore, a linear regression line that fits the data points is developed and additionally plotted as a red continuous line. Coinciding red and blue dotted lines indicate that the data points can be fitted by the ideal curve through linear regression. Clearly crossing lines would indicate opposing trends and thus refer to a bad reflection of the actual data through the model. In the following tables, the resulting plots illustrating the comparison of the model output with the original database are displayed. Each engine application is considered separately. In addition, each plot displays the root mean square error (RMSE) between data points and ideal curve.
x 10
4

FR Interval SH-Engines
2.5

3.5

x 10

4

MR Interval SH-Engines

3

RMSE: 3088 EFH Actual Interval [EFH]
2

RMSE: 2094.6 EFH

Actual Interval [EFH]

2.5

2

1.5

1.5

1

1

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 x 10
4

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
0.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 x 10
4

0.5 0.5

Predicted Interval [EFH]

Predicted Interval [EFH]

3

x 10

4

FR Interval MLH-Engines
2.5

x 10

4

MR Interval MLH-Engines

2.5

RMSE: 1588 EFH Actual Interval [EFH]
2

RMSE: 1042.1 EFH

Actual Interval [EFH]

2

1.5

1.5

1

1

2 Shaft Data 3 Shaft Data Regression of Data Ideal Curve
1 1.5 2 2.5 x 10 3
4

2 Shaft Data 3 Shaft Data Regression of Data Ideal Curve
0.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 x 10
4

0.5 0.5

Predicted Interval [EFH]

Predicted Interval [EFH]

Intervals

The plots show that the model generally represents the original database intervals

well. In the MLH plots, the three-spool engines have been highlighted. It can be seen that the three-spool data points follow the trend of the remaining data quite well. This is achieved

4.3 Model Plausibility

57

through the three-spool adjustment factor. In addition, the RMSE values of this analysis relate to the RMSEs of the regression analysis that was performed to develop the interval CERs (appendix C).
FR SVC per EFH SH-Engines
800 700
U SD RMSE: 30.7 EF H

MR SVC per EFH SH-Engines
800 700
U SD RMSE: 35.3 EF H

Actual Cost [USD/EFH]

600 500 400 300 200 100 100 200 300 400

Actual Cost [USD/EFH] Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
500 600 700 800

600 500 400 300 200 100 100 200 300 400

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
500 600 700 800

Predicted Cost [USD/EFH]

Predicted Cost [USD/EFH]

FR SVC per EFH MLH-Engines
900 800 900 800

MR SVC per EFH MLH-Engines

Actual Cost [USD/EFH]

700 600 500 400 300 200 100 100

Actual Cost [USD/EFH]

U SD RMSE: 32.4 EF H

U SD RMSE: 52.7 EF H

700 600 500 400 300 200 100 100

2 Shaft Data 3 Shaft Data Regression of Data Ideal Curve
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

2 Shaft Data 3 Shaft Data Regression of Data Ideal Curve
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Predicted Cost [USD/EFH]

Predicted Cost [USD/EFH]

Shop Visit Costs per EFH These plots generally indicate a weaker reflection of the original data through the developed model. This probably results from the fact that the SVC per EFH are made up of two independently modeled cost components (SV RC and LLP Cost). Especially the SH engine comparison reveals a clearly visible deviation between model and database. The data points here are clustered around a low cost level, while only a few data points reach higher cost dimensions. The explanation for this is that the database of SH engines mainly consists of small engines with a thrust level of about 20,000-30,000 lbf. The few data points that stick out are made up of the CF6-80C2A series engines. These are the only bigger size short-haul engines of the database. Therefore, the credibility of the model in this region is somewhat limited. It seems the model tends to predict generally higher costs for such big SH engines. For MLH engines, the picture is slightly more favorable. The data points are not as clustered around a certain cost level. The two data points that stick out stand for the PW4074/77 operated on a short haul route. The model is capable of reflecting this engine sufficiently however, one has to be careful

4.3 Model Plausibility

58

again, since there are only two data points that confirm the displayed trend in the higher cost level of short-haul operated MLH engines.

4.3.2 Model Results vs. Additional Data Sources
It is crucial to also compare the developed model with additional available data. However, adequate data sources are limited as it was pointed out in 3.1.2. Solely, the AeroStrategy database proved to be appropriate for a plausibility test. However, since this database does not provide all information that are compulsory for running the model, a few assumptions had to be made. The average derate is again assumed to be 10%, while the environment is considered as temperate. In addition it was necessary to define a legitimate flight time for each data point of the AeroStrategy table. As mentioned earlier, the AeroStrategy table indicates for most engines the respective aircraft, on which the estimation is based. Together with the ACA aircraft operator & owner guides it was determined what the global average flight time for these aircraft is. This average flight times were assigned to each data point and served as input for the model. Subsequently, the AeroStrategy database was further extended to also include the respective weight, thrust, number of spools and the engine application of each data point. Hence, all necessary input parameters have been defined to perform a comparison of the model with the addtional data. The plausibility based on the AeroStrategy database is tested for six output parameters. On the cost side, the SV restoration costs per EFH and the total SV restoration costs are compared separately for first and mature shop visits. Since the database does not provide any cost figures for LLP charges, this cost component could not be checked for its credibility. In addition, the first and mature removal intervals are compared between model and AeroStrategy estimates. The presentation of the plausibility analysis correlates to the previous plots. As before, the displayed RMSE values refer to the error between the data points and the dotted blue line (ideal curve).
4 x 10 FR Interval - Model vs. AeroStrategy 4 x 10 MR Interval - Model vs. AeroStrategy

3

2.2 2

2.5

RMSE: 3169.6 EFH Actual Interval [EFH]

RMSE: 1745.2 EFH
1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8

Actual Interval [EFH]

2

1.5

1

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
0.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 x 10 3
4

0.6 0.4

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
0.5 1 1.5 2 x 10
4

Predicted Interval [EFH]

Predicted Interval [EFH]

Intervals At first glance it becomes apparent, that the predicted intervals generally tend to be longer than the intervals of the AeroStrategy data tables. However, the model clearly reflects the

4.3 Model Plausibility

59

prevailing trend of the reference data table. The resulting RMSE values are in the same scale like the RMSEs of the other interval analysis plots, which indicates that model relates similarly to both the Aircraft Commerce and AeroStrategy database.
FR SVRC per EFH - Model vs. AeroStrategy MR SVRC per EFH - Model vs. AeroStrategy
400 250

Actual SVRC [USD/EFH]

Actual SVRC [USD/EFH]

U SD RMSE: 32.4 EF H

350

U SD RMSE: 41.2 EF H

200

300

250

150

200

100

150

50 50 100 150

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
200 250

100 100 150 200 250

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
300 350 400

Predicted SVRC [USD/EFH]

Predicted SVRC [USD/EFH]

SV Restoration Costs per EFH Comparing the SVRC per EFH of the developed model with AeroStrategy also reveals a satisfying picture. The model represents the trend of reference data points very well and the displayed RMSEs are in an acceptable scale.
FR SVRC - Model vs. AeroStrategy
6 6

MR SVRC - Model vs. AeroStrategy

Actual SVRC [USD million]

4

Actual SVRC [USD million]

5

RMSE: 0.6 mil USD

5

RMSE: 0.6 mil USD

4

3

3

2

2

1

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

1

Data Points Regression of Data Ideal Curve
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

0

0

Predicted SVRC [USD million]

Predicted SVRC [USD million]

Total SV Restoration Costs

The plots that are relating to the comparison of the total SVRC

generally show a bigger deviation between model and AeroStrategy. This is somewhat expected, since now the combined results of intervals and costs per EFH in shape of the total restoration costs are compared. It becomes apparent that the model generally predicts higher costs than estimated by AeroStrategy for engines that require high investment for an overhaul. These estimations mainly belong to the newest generation engines of widebody aircraft that were not part of the assembled database. Hence, it can be assumed that new generation engines generally achieve longer intervals with reduced cost per EFH. This is a trend that has been confirmed through comparing the older engine generation of the database with the current generation

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis

60

engines that formed the foundation of the database. It is likely that this trend continues now, leading to even longer intervals and lower shop visit costs per EFH for the newest generation engines. However, the overall deviation is considered as acceptable and these results are still regarded as confirmation of the developed model.

4.3.3 Summary of the Plausibility Tests
Considering that the objective was to develop a qualitative model that is capable of predicting realistic SV intervals and costs with respect to basic relationships concerning engine maintenance, the model relates to the expectations. Undeniably, there are considerable deviations between model and available databases. However, the model does not attempt to give an exact forecast of shop visits costs. It was proven that the model qualitatively reflects the general correlations that define shop visit intervals and costs. In addition, the predicted absolute values lie in the expected dimension. The present variations are considered admissible, granting that the exact forecast of SV intervals and costs is to hard to achieve.

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis
This section presents the results of a basic sensitivity analysis on the developed model. Excluding the engine application, the model relates to six input parameters (see fig. 4.1).
Parameter Thrust [lbf] Weight [lbs] EFH:EFC [h] Derate [%] EF TSF SH base values 27000 5139 1.9 10 1.1 1.0 MLH base values 78000 14545 6.0 10 1.1 1.0

Table 4.8: Input parameters and their base values for the sensitivity analysis

Based on these parameters the analysis was split into two parts. First, it was examined how the isolated output of the model reacts to changes on one single input parameter when the remaining parameters are kept constant. The six analyzed parameters and the values they are held constant to are summarized in tab. 4.8. The base SH engine values relate to the IAE V2500-A5 (A320 family) and the MLH values are derived from the PW 4077 (Boeing 777). These are two very common engines in their respective field of application. The environment was assumed to be hot and dry (EF = 1.1) and the two engines have two spools (TSF = 1.0). The impact of the environment and the number of spools was only modeled in rough discrete steps, while the model enables continuous changes of the remainder input parameters. As a result of this, the analysis of the four continuous parameters - thrust, weight, flight time and derate - was grouped together, while the impact of the number of spools and the environment is illustrated separately. This ensures a consistent presentation of the results. The second part is a sensitivity analysis on the

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis

61

impact of the six input parameters on the entire SV life cycle cost of an aircraft engine.

4.4.1 Sensitivity of Model Output
The impact of the continuous parameters is presented in two tables. The tables consist of four plots, each plot relating to one changing input parameter. Each table on the other hand relates to one certain output parameter. The results here are presented only for the range of SH engines. The MLH sensitivity analysis generally produced similar results. These results can be found in appendix E. 4.4.1.1 Continuous Parameters
x 10
4

Thrust - Interval Sensitivity
2.8

2.8 2.6 2.4

x 10

4

Weight - Interval Sensitivity
First-Run Mature-Run

First-Run Mature-Run

2.6 2.4

Interval [EFH]

2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1

Interval [EFH]

2.2

2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1

EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Derate = 10% Weight = 5139[lbs]
2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 x 10
4

EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Derate = 10% Thrust = 27000[lbf ]
4500 5000 5500 6000 6500

0.8 2.2

0.8 4000

Thrust [lbf ]

Weight [lbs]

2.8 2.6 2.4

x 10

4

EFH:EFC - Interval Sensitivity
2.4

x 10

4

Derate - Interval Sensitivity
First-Run Mature-Run

First-Run Mature-Run
2.2

2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 1 1.5 2 2.5

Interval [EFH]
Derate = 10% Thrust = 27000[lbf ] Weight = 5139[lbs]
3 3.5 4

2.2

2

Interval [EFH]

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2 0 5 10

EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Thrust = 27000[lbf ] Weight = 5139[lbs]
15 20

EFH:EFC [h]

Derate [%]

Table 4.9: SH Engines - Impact of the continuous parameters on the SV Interval

Intervals The results of the interval sensitivity reflect the theory very well. An increase in thrust would lead to a rapid drop of the achievable SV intervals, while an increase of the weight has an opposed effect (upper two diagramms in tab. 4.9). This represents the expectation that a higher thrust rating generally leads to shorter removal intervals. The influence of the derate and the flight time directly relates to the implemented severity curves (see D). In addition, mature

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis

62

SV intervals are generally shorter than first SV intervals, which has also been predicted by the outcome of the literature review.
Thrust - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
220

Weight - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
200 190

First-Run
200

First-Run Mature-Run

Mature-Run SVC per EFH [$/EFH] EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Derate = 10% Weight = 5139[lbs]
2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 x 10
4

SVC per EFH [$/EFH]

180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 4000 4500 5000

180

160

140

120

EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Derate = 10% Thrust = 27000[lbf ]
5500 6000 6500

100 2.2

Thrust [lbf ]

Weight [lbs]

EFH:EFC - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
350 210

Derate - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
200 190

First-Run
300

First-Run Mature-Run

Mature-Run SVC per EFH [$/EFH] Derate = 10% Thrust = 27000[lbf ] Weight = 5139[lbs]
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 0

SVC per EFH [$/EFH]

250

200

150

100

50

EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Thrust = 27000[lbf ] Weight = 5139[lbs]
5 10 15 20

EFH:EFC [h]

Derate [%]

Table 4.10: SH Engines - Impact of the continuous parameters on the SV costs per EFH

Shop Visit Costs per EFH The sensitivity of the shop visit costs per EFH is generally expected as well. The flight time and the derate affect the SVC per EFH as defined in the severity curves. An increase of the thrust yields to a considerable linear increase of the costs per EFH, while the weight affects the costs only to a minor extent. The little effect the weight has on the SVC per EFH results mainly from the fact that the CER for the restoration costs per EFH only depend on the thrust (see eqs. (3.5),(3.6)). 4.4.1.2 Discrete Parameters The remaining input parameters are implemented as discrete variables. Therefore, their impact is illustrated in bar plots. Apart from this, the presentation is analogue as seen before. Each couple of plots relates to one output parameter and each single plot shows the influence of one changing input parameter, while the remaining parameters are held constant according to tab. 4.8. The following plots illustrate the results for MLH engines using the example of the PW4077. The effect of the EF and the TSF on the SH engine intervals and costs are practically identical.

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis

63

Thus, they are not illustrated explicitly. The results largely reflect the expectations and directly relate to the implementation of the environment and three-spool factors.
2.2 2 1.8 1.6 x 10
4

Environment - Interval Sensitivity
3

x 10

4

No. Spools - Interval Sensitivity
First-Run Mature-Run

First-Run Mature-Run
2.5

Interval [EFH]

1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 temperate hot&dry erosive

Interval [EFH]

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

3 Spools

2 Spools

Environment

No. Spools

Environment - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
550 500 450 450

No. Spools - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
400

First-Run Mature-Run SVC per EFH [$/EFH]

First-Run Mature-Run

SVC per EFH [$/EFH]

350 300 250 200 150 100 50

400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 temperate hot&dry erosive

0

3 Spools

2 Spools

Environment

No. Spools

Table 4.11: MLH Engines - Impact of the discrete parameters on the direct model output

4.4.2 Sensitivity of Life Cycle SVC
The developed model is dedicated to serve as a module for a more complex aircraft life cycle cost tool. Therefore, it is now analyzed on how changes to the input parameters affect the accumulated shop visit costs of the entire life cycle of an engine. The life cycle shop visit costs SV C LC based on the developed model can be estimated as follows: SV C LC = Interval F R · SV C F R, EF H + [EF H LC − Interval F R ] · SV C M R, EF H (4.22)

The remaining EFH after the first removal are multiplied with the mature SVC per EFH to account for all mature SVs. The accumulated engine flight hours of the life cycle (EF H LC ) are calculated with the number of years in service Y ears LC and the annual utilization U til ann . EF H LC = Y ears LC · U til ann (4.23)

The annual utilization of the two example engines has been determined from the aircraft owner & operator guides of the aircraft commerce archive. According to [Air08d] a Boeing 777 on a

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis

64

long-haul route of 6.0 EFH:EFC equipped with a PW4077, typically achieves an annual utilization of 4500 EFH. An IAE V2500-A5 mounted to an A320 that is flying on 1.9 EFH:EFC short-haul route is likely to achieve around 2800 EFH [Air06a]. With an estimated life cycle duration of Y ears LC = 20 years, the total number of EFH in service for the two example engines yields to: EF H LC, SH = 20 · 2800 = 56,000 EF H EF H LC, M LH = 20 · 4600 = 90,000 EF H (4.24) (4.25)

The sensitivity analysis of the total life cycle SVC is analogue to the previous analysis of the SV intervals and SVC per EFH. The following tables show the effect of the four continuous and the two discrete parameters. Subsequently it is illustrated through tornado charts what parameters have the most significant impact. The applied base values relate to table 4.8. 4.4.2.1 Continuous Parameters The sensitivity of the influence of the continuous parameters is illustrated for each engine application separately.
12 11.5 11 x 10
6

Thrust - LCC Sensitivity - SH
10.1 10 9.9 9.8 9.7 9.6 9.5 9.4

x 10

6

Weight - LCC Sensitivity - SH

Life Cycle SVC [USD]

10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 2.2

EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Derate = 10% Weight = 5139[lbs]
2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 x 10
4

Life Cycle SVC [USD]

EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Derate = 10% Thrust = 27000[lbf ]
4500 5000 5500 6000 6500

9.3 4000

Thrust [lbf ]

Weight [lbs]

1.8

x 10

7

EFH:EFC - LCC Sensitivity - SH
1.15

x 10

7

Derate - LCC Sensitivity - SH

1.6

1.1

Life Cycle SVC [USD]

1.4

Life Cycle SVC [USD] Derate = 10% Thrust = 27000[lbf ] Weight = 5139[lbs]
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

1.05

1.2

1

1

0.95

0.8

0.6

0.9

EFH:EFC = 1.9[h] Thrust = 27000[lbf ] Weight = 5139[lbs]
0 5 10 15 20

0.4

0.85

EFH:EFC [h]

Derate [%]

Table 4.12: SH Engines - Impact of the continuous parameters on the life cycle SVC

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis

65

Short-Haul Engines The results for the range of SH engines largely relate to the sensitivity analysis of the SVC per EFH in tab. 4.10. However, the reduced life cycle SVC with increasing engine weight seem to be slightly odd on the first glance. Generally, one would expect that increasing weight leads to increased total SVC. However, the shown curve is a result of the mainly constant SVC per EFH and significantly prolonged first intervals with increasing engine weight (compare with tab. 4.10). From these four continuous input parameters, only the flight time and the derate can actually adopt a wide range of values depending on the operation of the aircraft. The engine thrust and weight are depending on the aspired performance level somewhat limited by design constraints. When observing the plots, it becomes apparent that especially the average flight time defines the resulting life cycle SVC. For the given example, it ranges from 6 mil USD in case of EFH:EFC = 4.0 to about 17 mil USD for a short-haul operation with EFH:EFC = 1.0.
3.55 3.5 3.4 3.45 3.4 3.35 3.3 3.25 3.2 3.15 7.4 x 10
7

Thrust - LCC Sensitivity - MLH
3.45

x 10

7

Weight - LCC Sensitivity - MLH

Life Cycle SVC [USD]

Life Cycle SVC [USD] EFH:EFC = 6[h] Derate = 10% Weight = 14545[lbs]
7.6 7.8 8 8.2 8.4 8.6 x 10
4

3.35

3.3

3.25

3.2

EFH:EFC = 6[h] Derate = 10% Thrust = 78000[lbf ]
1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 x 10
4

3.15 1.2

Thrust [lbf ]

Weight [lbs]

5

x 10

7

EFH:EFC - LCC Sensitivity - MLH
3.7

x 10

7

Derate - LCC Sensitivity - MLH

3.6 4.5

Life Cycle SVC [USD]

Life Cycle SVC [USD] Derate = 10% Thrust = 78000[lbf ] Weight = 14545[lbs]
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

3.5

4

3.4

3.5

3.3

3.2

3 3.1

EFH:EFC = 6[h] Thrust = 78000[lbf ] Weight = 14545[lbs]
0 5 10 15 20

2.5

3

EFH:EFC [h]

Derate [%]

Table 4.13: MLH Engines - Impact of the continuous parameters on the life cycle SVC

Medium-Long-Haul Engines For a better understanding of the sensitivity of the life cycle SVC for MLH engines, it is additionally referred to the respective tables in appendix E illustrating the sensitivity of the isolated model output for MLH engines. In general, the results resemble the previous SH engine plots. Solely, the impact of the weight is opposed. For MLH engines

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis

66

the dependency of the life cycle SVC on the engine weight relates to the general expectation. This results from the fact that unlike with the SH engines, the SVC per EFH of MLH engines considerably increase with increasing engine weight. Again the life cycle SVC considerably range with the average flight time. 4.4.2.2 Discrete Parameters As with the analysis of the isolated model output, the influence of the discrete parameters is illustrated only for MLH engines. The resulting plots for SH engines would show the exact same tendencies just in a different scale.

4 3.5

7 x 10 Environment - LCC Sensitivity - MLH

4 3.5

x 10

7

No. Spools - LCC Sensitivity - MLH

Life Cycle SVC [USD]

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

Life Cycle SVC [USD]
temperate hot&dry erosive

3

3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

3 Spools

2 Spools

Environment

No. Spools

Table 4.14: MLH Engines - Impact of the discrete parameters on the life cycle SVC

4.4.2.3 Sensitivity Analysis via Tornado Charts Tornado charts are often used to illustrate the sensitivity of a target parameter with respect to changes on all input variables simultaneously. The typical tornado shape results from arranging the input parameters in descending order according to the significance of their impact on the output. In order to show what parameters influence the life cycle SVC most considerably, tornado charts were generated for both SH and MLH engines. Therefore, it was determined how a deviation of -10% to +10% around the base values from tab. 4.8 affect the life cycle SVC. The three-spool factor was excluded from this consideration, since it only provides two discrete steps. The three discrete steps of the environment factor on the other hand, happen to fit in the chosen pattern. The EF for hot&dry environments serves as base value, while the two remaining steps roughly relate to the ±10% deviation, that was applied for the continuous input parameters. The results are illustrated in the following tornado charts.

Base Result: Name Derate Weight EF Thrust EFH:EFC

12.657 Low 12.882 12.891 11.755 11.527 13.897 - 10% High 12.522 12.518 13.558 13.799 11.336 + 10% Delta 0.360 0.373 1.803 2.272 2.561 +

4.4 Sensitivity Analysis

67

LCC - Sensitivity - SH Engines
EFH:EFC Thrust EF Weight Derate
11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0 + 10% - 10%

Life Cycle Shop Visit Costs [USD million]
Base Figure 4.3: Result: Tornado 30.670 on the sensitivity of the life cycle SVC of SH engines chart Name Low High Delta Derate 31.021 30.469 0.552 Short-Haul Engines For SH engines the model 1.759 indicates that especially the average flight time, the Weight 29.870 31.629 EFH:EFC 32.248 29.255 2.993 thrust and the environment factor have a significant impact on the accumulated SVC throughout EF 28.388 32.952 4.564 Thrust 28.130 33.195 5.065 the life cycle, while the weight and the derate play a comparable minor role.

LCC - Sensitivity - MLH Engines
Thrust EF EFH:EFC Weight Derate
28,0 29,0 30,0 31,0 32,0 33,0 34,0 + 10% - 10%

Life Cycle Shop Visit Costs [USD million]

Figure 4.4: Tornado chart on the sensitivity of the life cycle SVC of MLH engines

Medium-Long-Haul Engines The tornado chart for the MLH engines reveals a generally similar picture. However, the effect of the average flight time is considerably less severe, while changes on the engine weight gained in significance compared to SH engines. The explanation for this is that the chosen base flight time of EFH:EFC = 6.0 is rather a long-hong-haul route. In long-haul operations, slight changes on the average flight time generally have a less significant impact on the engine maintenance (see severity curve in appendix D.2).

5 Implementation into existing LCC-Tool
For the implementation of the model, the engine maintenance was sourced out into a dedicated function that is called in the main executive m-file lccmain.m of the LCC-tool. Up to this point, the developed LCC-tool required a fixed predefined number of checks. These checks included the engine shop visits, while it was assumed that engines generally have three shop visits in their life cycle. As a result of this thesis, it became obvious that this approach not necessarily reflects the reality. The number of shop visits can range significantly depending on the achieved shop visit intervals and on the total flight hours of the proposed life cycle. Therefore, the programme structure has to be modified to enable a flexible number of checks. The existing structure dictates that the number of total maintenance checks has to be defined prior to the utilization module lccmaintutil. Since the generated engine maintenance module lccmaintengine determines the expected intervals and thus the required number of SVs, it has to be executed before the call of lccmaintutil. The outsourcing into a dedicated function was done to concentrate the contribution of this thesis to the existing LLC-tool in one central place. The objective was to change the existing surrounding structure as little as possible. One main requirement for the implementation is that the new engine maintenance module enables both the estimation of shop visits according to the developed model and the predefinition of shop visits information extracted from available sources. In the following sections, the implementation of the key functionalities of the developed maintenance module is briefly described. However, it should be noted that a complete understanding of the subsequent explanations requires basic knowledge about the existing programme sequence. In case of unclarity, it is also referred to the commented programme code.

5.1 Function Definition and Input Modification
The generated function as it is implemented in the global executive m-file is defined as follows:
[Maint] = lccmaintengine(Aircraft,... Routes,... Maint,... General,... File,... CostTechFactor);

The various input parameter necessary for the this function are subsequently briefly described: • Aircraft Holds aircraft specifications as they are defined in lcc_frame_in_xxx.xml including key engine specifications

68

5.1 Function Definition and Input Modification

69

• Routes Contains all route informations, including flight time, derate and environment • Maint Maint includes all maintenance data for the aircraft and engine. Thus, it contains all engine specifications as well as ESV intervals and costs, as they are set in lcc_maintineng. xml. It holds the key parameters that are applied to account for all maintenance events in the following programme sequence. • General Contains general information, like life cycle length and basic utilization parameters such as, number of curfew hours or flight days per week. • File Includes the information of the loaded xml files and controls what files are loaded. • CostTechFactor Incldes all cost technology factors. The existing global programme structure accesses the Maint struct for the following reflection of the aircraft maintenance as part of the AC life cycle. Hence, the existing Maint struct, which is also an input of the developed function, is modified and represents the only output. The performed modifications result from the outcome of the implemented engine maintenance model. The model implementation is based on the assumption that the utilization of the aircraft is constant throughout the life cycle. That means all input parameter that are defined in the routes branch of the lcc_frame_in_xxx.xml are assumed to be constant for the entire life cycle. The engine maintenance function provides different control settings, which allow the user to influence the processing of the functions. These settings were implemented with simple truefalse queries. They are summarized as follows:
Variable Name true “1” engine maintenance model estimates SV intervals and costs according to input parameters engine specifications for maintenance estimation are extracted from engineMroFile spare engine costs are considered and included in the maintenance costs last shop visit is performed for a targeted remaining TOW until end of life cycle false “0” predefined SV intervals and costs from engineMroFile are applied for life cycle modeling engine specifications for maintenance estimation are extracted from lcc_frame_in_xxx spare engine costs are NOT considered last shop visit is fully performed regardless of expected end of life cycle struct xml file

Maint.ctrl.engMroType

Maint

lcc_frame_in_

File.input.engInputSource

File

lcc_frame_in_

Maint.ctrl.spareEngineCost

Maint

lcc_frame_in_

Maint.ctrl.engLastSvType

Maint

lcc_frame_in_

Table 5.1: Summary of the main control settings of lccmaintengine

All these control setting variables have been added to the main xml input file lcc_frame_in_ xxx. In addition, several input parameters that are required for executing the developed engine maintenance model were not yet defined and respectively had to be added to the input xml files. This includes, the the derate, environment, engine application, number of spools as well as shop visit duration, spare engine leasing rate an a few technology factors. Since the developed function allows to extract the required engine specifications from two different input xml files, both the

5.2 Estimating the Shop Visits

70

engineMroFile and the lcc_frame_in_xxx have been modified. All additional modifications on each xml file are summarized in the tables 5.2 and 5.3.
Added Parameters in lcc_frame_in_xxx.xml Parameter deRate [%] environment nSpools range leasingRate [USD/day] sVduration [days] Description average derate flown, range between [0.0-0.2] can xml branch Routes Routes Aircraft Aircraft Aircraft Aircraft Input into LCC-Tool Routes.deRate Routes.environment Aircraft.engine.nSpools Aircraft.engine.range Aircraft.engine.leasingRate Aircraft.engine.sVduration

accounts for the environment condition, [1.0 1.1 1.2] number of engine spools, [2 3] accounts for the aircraft’s design application [’SH’ ’MLH’] expected leasing spare engines rate for

expected average shop visit duration

Table 5.2: Summary of the lcc_frame_in_xxx.xml modification
Added Parameters in engineMroFile.xml Parameter range leasingRate [USD/day] sVduration [days] Description accounts for the aircraft’s design application [’SH’ ’MLH’] expected leasing spare engines rate for xml branch range leasingRate sVduration Input into LCC-Tool Maint.engineMaint.range Maint.engineMaint.leasingRate Maint.engineMaint.sVduration

expected average shop visit duration

Table 5.3: Summary of the engineMroFile modification

5.2 Estimating the Shop Visits
The programme code is generally separated into two main branches. Depending on the setting of Maint.ctrl.engMroType either one of them is active. Most of the executed operations are dedicated to their respective branch. Thus, they appear twice in slightly modified from in the programme code, while only the operations of the active branch are executed. In case Maint.ctrl.engMroType is set to ’0’, the function estimates the shop visit costs and intervals according the developed engine maintenance model. Thus, this first branch requires the implementation of the maintenance model structure as developed in 4.1. Therefore, each of the seven CERs as presented in 3.3 was simply implemented as a dedicated function. The LLP cost CER is for instance carried out by the follwoing function:
function [LLP_cost] = LLP_function(thrust,weight) %% WHAT DOES IT DO? %this function generates the Base LLP costs [dollar/EFC] of the engine % INPUT: thrust and weight of analysed engine % OUTPUT: LLP costs [dollar/EFC]

5.2 Estimating the Shop Visits

71

% Author: Ralf Seemann % Date: 11.08.2010 %% PREDICTION FUNCTION LLP_cost = −115.31326 ... +0.0194512.*weight ... +0.0031206.*thrust ... +(weight−8608.78125).*((weight−8608.78125).*2.69234e−6);

Analogue to the developed CERs, the severity and time & material curves are also reflected by dedicated functions. While the TMF curves can be each implemented by one single vector (see tables 4.1 and 4.2), the severity curves have to be represented by matrices. According to the input parameters the output value is then interpolated between the values defined in the curve vector or multiple curve matrix (see appendix D). The interpolation between two values simultaneously as required for the severity matrices was achieved by the matlab function interp2. An example programme code for the implementation of the severity curves is given below:
function [severity_factor]= SM_severity_value(FcToFH,DeRate) %% WHAT DOES IT DO? %this function generates the severity matrix for short−haul engines %and gives out the respective severity factor according to the input % % % % INPUT: FC:FH Ratio, De−Rate OUTPUT: severity_factor Author: Ralf Seemann Date: 11.08.2010

% Severity Matrix %rows = [0.5 1 1.5 1.9 2.5 3 4 5 6 ]−−−> FC:FH %columns = [0% 5% 10% 15% 20%] −−−> De−Rate severity_matrix = [2.8 2.6 2.4 2.28 2.16 2.10 1.93 1.75 1.65 1.54 1.62 1.47 1.32 1.23 1.14 1.20 1.10 1.00 0.94 0.88 1.06 1.11 0.88 0.83 0.77 0.96 0.88 0.80 0.75 0.71 0.85 0.78 0.71 0.66 0.62 0.78 0.72 0.66 0.62 0.59 0.74 0.69 0.63 0.60 0.56]; % defining derate and FcToFH steps derate_vec = [0 5 10 15 20]; FcToFH_vec = [0.5 1 1.5 1.9 2.5 3 4 5 6]; %% interpolation using interp2 severity_factor = interp2(derate_vec,FcToFH_vec,severity_matrix,DeRate,FcToFH);

5.3 Processing the Predefined Shop Visits

72

With the four effect curve functions the total number of generated functions sums up to eleven. The remaining effects do not have to be reflected by dedicated functions, since they result directly from the input. The model branch that is active when the SV intervals and costs are supposed to be estimated, calls these functions and performs all necessary conversions as dictated by the model structure seen in figure 4.2. The implementation of the developed model structure is also represented by the example calculation in 4.2. The input parameters for the CER and effect functions are extracted either from lcc_frame_in_xxx.xml or from engineMroFile, depending on the setting of File.input.engInputSource.

5.3 Processing the Predefined Shop Visits
The second main branch of the programme code is active when Maint.ctrl.engMroType is set to ’1’. In this case, the shop visits informations are extracted from the engineMroFile, where they have been predefined. The following estimation of the required number of shop visits, the consideration of spare engine costs as well as the definition of the last shop visits and the output generation are performed in each branch separately. For estimating the number of required shop visits, the average mature shop visit interval is calculated based on the defined shop visit intervals extracted from engineMroFile. Therefore, the intervals of all shop visits following the first one are averaged. This relates to the general assumption that engines reach maturity after their first shop visit. The following programme parts are defined in each of the two branches.

5.4 Consideration of Spare Engine Costs
Depending on the setting of Maint.ctrl.spareEngineCost, this programm part either estimates the costs for spare engines according to eq. (4.1) or it sets them to zero. The spare engine costs are then added to the shop visits costs during the output generation.

5.5 Estimation of Required Shop Visit Number
The objective was to implement a flexible total number shop visits. Therefore, the number of necessary shop visits throughout the life cycle has to be estimated. In order to achieve this, one has to estimate the expected total flight hours during the life cycle. The exact total life cycle FH are not known before the utilization function lccmaintutil has been executed. However, the number of shop visits has to be fixed for running the utilization function. This problem was solved by simplifying the calculation of the total life cycle FH (LCFH) . Therefore, the routine for calculating the maximum possible FH during the LC was adopted from the lccmaintutil function. The reduction of this maximum number of flight hours due to the various maintenance events was neglected. This calculation is one of the few programme parts that is executed globally, since it is applied for both programme lines.

5.6 Definition of Last Shop Visits

73

%% ESTIMATION OF YEARLY UTILIZATION PRIOR TO THE UTILIZATION MAINT MODULE % this is necessary for the estimation of how many SV are necessary opsHoursWeek_h = General.opsDaysWeek_d*(24−General.curfewHoursDay_h); % [h] weeklyFC = (Routes.relativefrequency(:) .* opsHoursWeek_h) ./ Routes.cycleTime_h(:); weeklyFH = weeklyFC.* fcToFh'; %fcToFh = flight_time weeklyFC = sum(weeklyFC); %number of FCs per week weeklyFH = sum(weeklyFH); %number of FH per week %total flight hours of engine life with the factor 0.98 for reducing total %flight hours due to maintenance events (reduced available FHs) lcFH = 52*weeklyFH*yearsInService*0.98;

The following estimation of the shop visit number is dedicated to the respective branch. Depending on the defined or estimated first and mature SV intervals, the number of required SVs is calculated through a while loop. Noteworthy is that this loop only calculates the number of full shop visits. This is explained by the following example. The first SV interval is assumed to be 15,000 EFH, mature intervals equal 10,000 EFH and the LCFH equals 48,000 EFH. In this calculation, the third shop visit would take place after: 3rdSVEF H = IntervalF R + IntervalM R + IntervalM R = 15,000 + 10,000 + 10,000 = 35,000 EF H (5.1)

In this pattern the fourth SV would take place after an accumulated flight time of 45.000 EFH. However, since the life cycle ends already after 48,000 EFH, it is not necessary to perform a full fourth shop visit that would enable the engine to remain on-wing for another 10,000 EFH resulting in accumulated 55,000 EFH. In this case, the loop gives out that the engine requires ’3’ full shop visits during the proposed life cycle. The last shop visit is considered separately in a distinct programme part.

5.6 Definition of Last Shop Visits
The consideration of the last shop visit relates to the setting of Maint.ctrl.engLastSvType. If it is set to ’1’ the programme determines the remaining TOW between last shop visit and end of life cycle. In the example above, this relates to: remainingT OW = LCF H − 4thSVEF H = 48,000 − 45,000 = 3,000 EF H Thus, the last shop visit would have to restore the engine to a level that it can remain on-wing for another 3.000 EFH. Therefore, the last shop visit is considered as targeted SV with reduced workscopes. The incurred costs for this targeted SV are calculated with the mature shop visit cost per EFH (see eq. (4.18)) multiplied with the remainingT OW . If it is assumed that a mature SV in the previous example costs 3 mil USD, then the matre SVC per EFH yield to:

5.7 Output Generation

74

SV C M R, EF H =

3,000,000 SV CM R U SD = = 300 IntervalM R 10,000 EF H

Hence, the cost for the last shop visit as indicated in the example result in: SV C last = SV C M R, EF H · remainingT OW = 300 · 3,000 = 900,000 U SD This calculation is performed in both branches with the respective interval and cost data resulting either from the implemented engine maintenance model or from the predefined shop visit data. In case Maint.ctrl.engLastSvType is set to ’0’, the programme handles the last shop visit like all previous SVs as full shop visit regardless of the expected remaining TOW until the end of the life cycle. This setting should be preferred when selling the engine on the surplus market after the end of the aircraft’s life cycle is considered.

5.7 Output Generation
In the existing programme structure, the shop visit intervals and costs are read from the engineMroFile xml file and then written in Maint.engineMaint.shopVisit according to the xml structure. This data is then applied to determine the utilization and to define the maintenance event costs. The objective was to keep this structure. Therefore, the programmed engine maintenance module simply overwrites the Maint.engineMaint.shopVisit entries according to the outcome of the engine maintenance function. Hence, the output has the exact same structure as it is defined in in the engineMroFile xml file, with the addition of a field for the spare engine costs. This enables an uncomplicated implementation of the developed function into the global programme sequence. The following maintenance cost function lccmaintcost classifies all check expenses into four categories. The cost elements from the modified Maint.engineMaint.shopVisit variable are allocated as follows:
Allocation of SVC on CheckExpenses manhours materialcost fixcost laborcost LLP costs restoration costs + spare engine costs -

Table 5.4: Reflection of the engine maintenance costs in the lccmaintcost function

This allocation enables a differentiated adjustment of the restoration cost and the LLP cost through the existing technology factors for each CheckExpenses category.

6 Summary and Conclusion
The objectives of this work were to review the literature on maintenance of commercial jet engines and based on that, to develop a qualitative model that estimates engine shop visit costs and intervals depending on the major influence factors on engine maintenance. Furthermore, it was intended to implement this model into the existing maintenance module of the LCC simulation tool. After building up a comprehensive review on the prevailing concepts of engine maintenance, cost estimating relationships (CER) regarding the engine shop visit costs and intervals were developed using the methodological approach described in the NASA Cost Estimating Handbook [NAS08]. Therefore, a database that contains numerous current engine model variants and their shop visit intervals and costs was assembled from an extensive review of the operator & owner guides of the Aircraft Commerce magazine archive. However, important effects like the environmental conditions and the operational severity have been normalized for the database assembly, which led to CERs that do not reflect the influence of these factors. Therefore, the developed CERs were complemented by a subsequent effect-module that adjusts the results of the CERs according to the severity of the engine’s operation. The final model relates to six different input parameters: engine thrust, dry weight, number of spools, average flight length, applied derate and the present environment. Since the literature review and the assembled database indicated that short-haul operated engines generally exhibit different maintenance characteristics than engines that are operated on medium-long-haul routes, the model was split into two separate paths, each dedicated to one of these engine applications. In addition the model distinguishes between first-run and mature-run shop visits to account for the generally longer intervals and lower maintenance cost per EFH of new engines compared to engines that reached maturity. The resulting model was then tested for its plausibility by comparing the model results with available cost and interval estimations from AeroStrategy. The conclusion of these plausibility tests were that the general trend of the developed model and the Aerostrategy estimations coincide. However, the AeroStrategy estimates for new generation engines tend to lie below the predicted values of the model. This was not unexpected, since the past has shown that newer generations engines generally achieve longer intervals and lower maintenance costs per EFH than the previous generation. Since the database assembly was limited to engines that have been in operation for the last two decades, the developed model reflects the current generation engines best. The problem is that there is no reliable data on the average intervals and costs for the newest engine generation. However, with these information available one could determine a technology factor that adjusts the model results and enables a better forecast also for the these

75

6 Summary and Conclusion

76

new engines. The basic engine maintenance characteristics are assumed to remain constant also with newer generation engines. Therefore, the applied CERs and adjustment parameters could be also replaced with newly developed relationships that are based on available data for the newer generation engines, while the rest of the model structure could remain unchanged. The developed model was subsequently implemented into the LCC simulation tool as an independent module. Therefore, the engine maintenance was excluded from the existing maintenance module. This ensures that the contribution of this thesis to the LCC-tool is clearly separated and it enabled the consideration of a flexible number of shop visits, while the previous maintenance module relied on a fixed number of shop visits. Therefore, the new engine maintenance module estimates the anticipated number of shop visits of the life cycle depending on the utilization input and the estimated shop visit intervals. Since the developed engine MRO model requires a few new input parameters that have not been included in the original input files, the xml input files have been modified accordingly. The existing global structure of the LLC simulation tool remained unchanged. The new module keeps the functionality that the shop visit intervals and costs can be predefined if known from reliable data sources. The problem is that the actual shop visit costs and intervals heavily depend on the engine’s operational severity. That means, the applied predefined shop visit estimations have to relate to the utilization defined in the input file. This applies especially for the flight time as major influence factor. Alternatively, the available maintenance data could also be adjusted with the average severity curves established in the framework of this thesis.

Bibliography
[AAE04] AAE 451 - Aircraft Design: Method for Calculating Direct Operating Cost (2004), URL http://www.soton.ac.uk/~jps7/Aircraft%20Design% 20Resources/Cost%20data/aircraft%20operating%20cost%20equations.pdf [Ack10] Ackert. S: Engine Maintenance Concepts for Financiers: Elements of Engine Shop Maintenance Costs (2010) [ACT08] ACT: Keep on running - engine maintenance and cost reduction. AIRCRAFT TECHNOLOGY (Jun/Jul2008), (94): S. 52–60 [AEG00] AEG [Air67] [Air99] [Air00] Working Group: Aircraft Evaluation Guidelines: Ref: V62/CMP/SSA/16700C, issue 2, rev. 2 Aufl. (August 2000) Air Transport Association of America: Standard Methode of Estimating comparative direct Operating Cost of Turbine Powered Transport Airplanes (1967) Aircraft Commerce: Fine tuning engine maintenance costs. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Jul/Aug 1999), (6): S. 42–48 Aircraft Commerce: Ageing CF6-50 delivers acceptable maintenance costs: Maintenance & Engineering. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Nov/Dec 2000), (14): S. 18–24 [Air04a] Aircraft Commerce: LLP management for widebody engines. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (2004), (39): S. 29–36 [Air04b] Aircraft Commerce: LLP management for short-haul engines. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Apr/May 2004), (34): S. 36–44 [Air04c] Aircraft Commerce: CFM56-3B1/B2/C1 maintenance cost analysis. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Feb/Mar 2004), (33): S. 27–34 [Air05a] Aircraft Commerce: Using ECM to reduce engine maintenance costs. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Aug/Sep 2005), (42): S. 36–41 [Air05b] Aircraft Commerce: CFM56-7B maintenance costs & reserves analysis. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Feb/Mar 2005), (39) [Air06a] A320 Family Maintenance Analysis & Budget. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (2006), (44): S. 18–31 [Air06b] Aircraft Commerce: Owner’s & Operator’s Guide: CFM56-3 Series. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Apr/May 2006), (45): S. 9–31 [Air06c] Aircraft Commerce: Systems for Engine health monitoring. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Feb/Mar 2006), (44): S. 53–57

77

Bibliography

78

[Air06d] Aircraft Commerce: CF6-80C2 maintenance analysis & budget. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Oct/Nov 2006), (48): S. 18–30 [Air07a] Aircraft Commerce: The economics of repairing engine parts. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Aug/Sep 2007), (30): S. 33–37 [Air07b] Aircraft Commerce: CFM56-5A/5B series specifications. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Feb/Mar 2007), (50): S. 6–9 [Air08a] Aircraft Commerce: Big engine in-service performance & maintenance. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Aug/Sep 2008), (59): S. 41–53 [Air08b] Aircraft Commerce: V2500 maintenance analysis & budget (Feb/Mar 2008), (56): S. 17–31 [Air08c] Aircraft Commerce: CFM56-7B maintenance analysis & budget. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Jun/Jul 2008), (58): S. 18–28 [Air08d] Aircraft Commerce: 777 family maintenance analysis & budget. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Oct/Nov 2008), (60): S. 12–23 [Air09] Aircraft Commerce: Analysing the engine shop visit process. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE (Feb/Mar 2009), (62): S. 45–52 [Bec09] [Ben08] Beck A.: Engine Maintenance Cost Monitoring (29.10.2009) Bennett J.: PMA parts penetration and acceptability. THE ENGINE YEARBOOK (2008): S. 74–79 [BJ82] Birkler J.L., Garfinkle J. B.: Development and Production Cost Estimating Relationships for Aircraft Turbine Engines, RAND (1982) [Bra04] [Bru96] [Bur97] Braeunling, W.: Flugzeugtriebwerke, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2 Aufl. (2004) Brundick B.: Parametric Cost Estimating Handbook (1996) Burton M.: Piston Engines Propellers Gas Turbine Engines: The commercial pilot’s study manual series (1997) [Bur10] [Car00] Burchell B.: Wanted: More On-Wing Wizardry. AVIATION WEEK (Apr 2010) Carsten Mildt: Entwicklung einer Methode zur Abschätzung der Kosten für die Instandhaltung der Flugzeugzellen und -systeme im kommerziellen Flugverkehr, TU Berlin (2000), URL http://www.dfld.de/Downloads/20000725_ Wartungskosten.pdf [CFM09] CFM: CFM56 Cost of Ownership (October 2009) [Chu08] Churchwell P.: Fundamentals of CER Development: Defense Acquisition University (June 2008) [Cum97] Cumpsty N.A.: Jet Propulsion: A simple guide to the aerodynamic and thermodynamic design and performance of jet engines, Cambridge University Press (1997)

Bibliography

79

[Eng10] Engine Yearbook: Labour qualitiy, not labour rates drives maintenance cost optimization. THE ENGINE YEARBOOK (2010): S. 52–56 [FAA04] FAA - Federal Aviation Administration: Airplane Flying Handbook: FAA-H8083-3A (2004) [FAA09] FAA - Federal Aviation Administration: GUIDANCE MATERIAL FOR AIRCRAFT ENGINE LIFE-LIMITED PARTS REQUIREMENTS (2009) [FAA10] FAA - Federal Aviation Administration: Aircraft Certification: Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) (2010), URL http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/ design_approvals/pma/ [Gal08] Galorath D.: Parametric Estimating Handbook: 4th Edition (2008) education/vocabulary.html [Gun95] Gunston B.: The Development of Jet and Turbine Aero Engines, Patrick Stephens Limited (1995) [Hol08] Holland J.: End of the PMA legitimacy debate. AIRCRAFT TECHNOLOGY (Oct/Nov 2008), (96): S. 64–71 [Hue03] Huenecke K.: Jet Engines: Fundamentals of Theory, Design and Operation, Airlife Publishing Ltd (2003) [Jet08] JetEngine Consulting: Our Consultancy Philosophy (2008), URL http://www. jetengineconsulting.com/pdf/JEC_Consulting_Philosophy.pdf [KLM07] KLM: Engine Water Wash at KLM Engineering & Maintenance (2007), URL http://www.klm.com/travel/csr_en/images/Engine%20Water%20Wash%20EN_ tcm256-100165.pdf [Lin08] Linke-Diesinger A.: Systems of Commercial Turbofan Engines: An Introduction to Systems Functions, Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg (2008) [Lon00] [Mei05] Long J.: Parametric Cost Estimating in the New Millenium (2000) Meier N.: Jet Engine Specification Database: Civil Turbojet/Turbofan Specifications (2005), URL http://www.jet-engine.net/civtfspec.html [MM10] Mueller M., Staudacher S.: Probalisitsche Modellierung des Einflusses variierender Umwelt- und Betriebsbedingungen auf die Triebwerksinstandhaltung (2010) [NAS08] NASA: Cost Estimating Handbook, http://www.ceh.nasa.gov (2008) [OCE91] Otis C. E., Vosbury P. A.: Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines of the World: Dictonary of the Gas Turbine, IAP, Inc. (1991) [Pet08] Peter Nolte: Bewertung des Zusammenhangs zwischen globalen Szenarien und dem ökonomisch getriebenen Flugzeugentwurf: Diplomarbeit (2008)

[GE 08] GE Aviation: Engine Education: Vocabulary (2008), URL http://www.geae.com/

Bibliography

80

[Rol07]

Rolls-Royce Ltd.: Gas turbine technology: Introduction to a jet engine (2007), URL http://www.rolls-royce.com/Images/gasturbines_tcm92-4977.pdf Roskam J.: Alirplane Design: Part VIII: Airplane Cost Estimation: Design, Development, Manufacturing and Operating, Lawrence, Kansas (1990)

[Ros90]

[Rou07] Roux E.: Turbofan and Turbojet Engines: Database Handbook, Elodie ROUX (2007) [Rup00] Rupp O.: Instandhaltungskosten bei zivilen Strahltriebwerken (2000) [Sch98] [Sch09] Scholz D.: DOCsys - A Method to Evaluate Aircraft Systems, Bonn (1998) Schilling T.: Methoden zur Modellierung von Flugzeuginstandhaltung - Diplomarbeit (2009), URL http://www.tu-harburg.de/ilt/ [TB07] TU-Berlin: DOC-Abschätzungsmethoden (2007), URL http://www.ilr.tu-berlin. de/LB/ [Tew07] Tewari A.: Atmospheric and Space Flight Dynamics: Modeling and Simulation with Matlab and Simulink, Birkhäuser, Boston Basel Berlin (2007) [Tre79] Treager I.E.: Aircraft gas Turbine Engine Technology: Second Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company (1979) [Tur04] Turso J.A.: A Foreign Object Damage Event Detector Data Fusion System for Turbofan Engines: NASA/TM—2004-213192 (2004) [UCL] UCLA: Probability and statistics, Dissertation, URL http://wiki.stat.ucla.edu/ socr/index.php/Probability_and_statistics_EBook#Two-Way_ANOVA

List of Figures
1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 Aircraft MRO cost overview [Jet08] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engine core of gas turbine engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Working cycle of a gas turbine engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GEnx-2B - high bypass twin-spool turbofan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison: two- and three-spool configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The main modules of a V2500-A5 [Lin08] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Correlation between Take-Off EGT and OAT [Air06b] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Removal causes depending on aircraft operation [Ack10] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effects of engine wear on the EGT Margin [Ack10] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trend of EGT margin erosion rates over accumulated EFC . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4 4 6 7 7 10 14 14 15 17 17 21 22 23 25 28 30 41 42 47 48 67 67

2.10 Engine shop visit process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.11 Influences of the TOW on the DMC of an engine [Eng10] . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.12 Two example flight profiles [Ack10] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.13 Shop visit rate and DMC in relation to the flight hour flight cycle ratio . . . . . 2.14 Example severity curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.15 Engine maintenance cost breakdown structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.16 Parametric Cost Estimating process steps [NAS08] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.17 Example data points for cost-weight dependency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 JMP screening function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . JMP regression results example output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Black box of maintenance model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inner structure of the cost estimating model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tornado chart on the sensitivity of the life cycle SVC of SH engines . . . . . . . Tornado chart on the sensitivity of the life cycle SVC of MLH engines . . . . . .

i

List of Tables
2.1 2.2 2.3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 Initial EGTM and mature EGT erosion rates for CFM56-7B variants [Air08c] . . Comparison of EMC consideration in different DOC methods . . . . . . . . . . . Criteria for the evaluation of regression results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of cost estimating relationship hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 27 31 33 36 37 37 40 40 41 43 50 50 51 52 52 53 55 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 69 70 70 74

Structure of the collected Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Determined average SH severity curve for a derate of 10% . . . . . . . . . . . . . Determined average MLH severity curve for a derate of 10% . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of DB base conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of the preliminary dependent variables to be analyzed . . . . . . . . . Summary of the final dependent variables to be analyzed . . . . . . . . . . . . . Defined standard units for the input parameters of the CERs . . . . . . . . . . . SH Engine Time & Material factor with respect to the flight time . . . . . . . . . MLH Engine Time & Material factor with respect to the flight time . . . . . . . Environment factors for different environmental conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . Input engine specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Input engine utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of CER results for the example input parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . Final output for the example input parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Input parameters and their base values for the sensitivity analysis . . . . . . . . SH Engines - Impact of the continuous parameters on the SV Interval . . . . . .

4.10 SH Engines - Impact of the continuous parameters on the SV costs per EFH

4.11 MLH Engines - Impact of the discrete parameters on the direct model output . 4.12 SH Engines - Impact of the continuous parameters on the life cycle SVC . . . . 4.13 MLH Engines - Impact of the continuous parameters on the life cycle SVC . . 4.14 MLH Engines - Impact of the discrete parameters on the life cycle SVC . . . . 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Summary of the main control settings of lccmaintengine . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of the lcc_frame_in_xxx.xml modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of the engineMroFile modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reflection of the engine maintenance costs in the lccmaintcost function . . . .

ii

A Maintenance Costs -HW(QJLQH &RQVXOWLQJ
Operational Cost A.1 Engine MRO Cost Analysis Engine MRO Cost Analysis
Repairs 3% Fees 12% DAT* 25% US$ 3.9 billion Parts Repair
Life Limited Parts (LLP) 4% FAn 5% Other airfoils 21% Other 28% HPT aifoils 21%

uß, den die altungskosten eines TriebReinigungstfernung von chaufeln und stellung der ufbetrieb des Kohlepulver itzt werden. nreinigungen s Verdichters er reduzierte uch die Be-

anfallenden Kosten können im wesentlichen in Stationary parts Combustor drei Bereiche aufgeteilt werden: Kosten für die 15% PMA Parts 6% Montage/Demontage des Triebwerks, Reparatur3% 60% kosten für Einzelteile und Materialkosten für den Life Limited Parts Ersatz von nicht mehr reparierbaren billion US$ 9.3 Bauteilen. Die Material (LLP) Material Verteilung der Kosten auf bestimmte Bauteile und 19% Bereiche ist von großer Bedeutung, da sie Rückschlüsse auf potentiell erreichbare Kostenreduzierungen für die einzelnen Bauteile - beispielsweise Used Material durch die Entwicklung neuer Reparaturen - zuläßt. 12% New Material BILD 4 zeigt beispielhaft Parts Repair & Material Forecast Source: 2007 AeroStrategy Aeroengine die Verteilung der Instandhaltungskosten bei einer Überholung auf die Bauteile, unterteilt nach Materialkosten (blau 24 November 2006 gekennzeichnet) und Arbeitskosten (rot bzw. gelb gekennzeichnet). Ausdrücklich sei hier darauf hingewiesen, dass lebensdauerbegrenzte Teile A.2 Shop nicht mit berücksichtigt sind. (LLP's) hier Visit Cost Driver
others 10 % Combustor 2,5 % Cases 5 % Bearings 2,5 % Airfoils 14 % Disassembly Assembly 15 %

*) Disassembly, Assembly, Test

66%

4

*LLP cost not included Blue: material cost Red: labour cost [Rup00]

Airfoils 30 %

Accessories 5 % Stationary Parts 8 % Rotating Parts 4 % Seals 2 % Combustor 2 %

vement of MTBSV ntroduction of ar Coke Cleaning

an Jul

ng und e auf die

BILD 4.

Kostentreiber bei der Überholung von Triebwerken.

Durchführung eispielhaft in n Fall führte 9 eine interne ge Reinigung ke Cleaning)

Auffallend ist der große Kostenanteil für Airfoils insgesamt fast 50% der Überholungskosten. Primär entstehen diese Kosten durch den Ersatz von nicht mehr reparablen Airfoils aus dem Bereich der Hochdruckturbine. Dies sind sicherlich mit die am höchsten belasteten Bauteile im gesamten Triebwerk, wobei erschwerend hinzu-

iii

B Database
B.1 Aircraft Commerce Shop Visit Reserves & Intervals Example Table
44 I MAINTENANCE & ENGINEERING
POSSIBLE MANAGEMENT, SHOP VISIT PATTERN & LLP REPLACEMENT TIMING OF CFM56-7B SERIES ENGINES Removal Interval EFC Accumulated EFC Workscope content Cost-$ $/EFC LLP replacement LLP cost $ LLP $/EFC Total $/EFC Total $/EFH

-7B27 1st 2nd -7B26 1st 2nd -7B24 1st 2nd

10,000 7,000-8,000

10,000 17,000-18,000

Core Core & LPT

1,200,000 1,500,000

120 200

Core & LPT

1,211,000

79 79

199 279

111 155

13,000 12,000

13,000 25,000

Core fan/LPC & LPT

1,250,000 1,700,000

96 142

Core Fan/LPC & LPT

785,000 731,000

91 91

190 233

106 130

16,000 14,000

16,000 Core & LPT 30,000 Core & fan/LPC

1,550,000 1,700,000

97 121

Core & LPT Fan/LPC

1,211.000 305,000

87 71

184 192

102 107

-7B18/20/22 1st 17,000-18,000 2nd 12,000-13,000

17,000-18,000 Core & LPT 28,000-30,000 Core & fan/LPC

1,600,000 1,700,000

92 136

Core & LPT Fan/LPC

1,211,000 305,000

78 73

170 209

95 116

B.2 Classification of Aircraft Engines
replacing LLPs. 45,000-50,000EFH. This will be equal to may be a complete overhaul of all Crawford estimates that a heavier 15-17 years of operation for most modules. Putting aircraft engines into categories according to their application is rather subjective. A shop visit that included work on the LPT airlines’ operations. The highest thrust “The -7B18/20/22 will have a core module would add up to another 500 rated route as middle-haul, while an intercontinental operating refurbishment without LLP classify a regional airline may replacement, certain-7B27 will have accumulated about MH, $200,000 for materials and parts 20,000EFC and 38,000EFH at the second plus fan and booster refurbishment with airline could classify the same route asvisit, afterdistance. of about 13and another $100,000 for sub-contract shop short a total time The following table reflects the perspective LLP replacement,” explains Crawford. repairs. The same labour 15 years’ service. This would be at a total accumulated of the author of this thesis. In the This indicates that the second shop the engines of the total rate of $70 per framework of this thesis, database the have MH would take the cost for time close to 30,000EFC. shop visit to $1.5-1.6 million. The medium-rated short-haul a been divided in -7B24 will have (SH) visits will not occur for about another and medium/long-haul (MLH) engines. The classification is Crawford estimates that a complete seven years for the oldest and highest similar second shop visit. notHigher rated -7B26 engines that did based on the absolute range rated engines. It is therefore too early to engines are mounted. 3,000MH, up of the aircraft, on which the overhaul would use about Rather it estimate the intervals to the third shop to $1.2 million in materials and parts, not have work done on the LPT at the corresponds to have all major average flight their subsequent workscopes.and respectively thefor sub-contract visits and time these aircraft and about $500,000 engines were first shop visit would the rough modules worked during the second designed for.onHowever, engines can by all means operate outsiderepairs. This would range. costgood their design take total A for the shop visit to about $1.7 million. Some shop visit, as well as replacement of LPT and fan/LPC LLPs. This would be at a Shop the inputs guideline for classifying the engines for visitdeveloped model is the engine shops estimate that thebetween common distinction MH inputs for these heavier shop visits may be as total accumulated time of 25,000EFC. Inputs for shop visits in terms of manshort-haul aircraft (e.g. A320, Boeing(MH), materials and parts and cost wideas 4,000. aircraft (e.g. A330, “The highest rated -7B27s would hours 737, Embraer E-Jets) and high body have another core refurbishment and of A340, Boeing 777/747). From the sub-contract repairs for thedeveloped model, wide-body aircraft are perspective of the -7B, can be workscope on the LPT, with LLPs being estimated on the basis of inputs for the -3 replaced in by typical MLH LLP amortisation powered all these modules,” says engines,series. short-haul aircraft respectively by SH engines. Crawford. This raises the issue of the “Man-hour inputs are expected to be LLP amortisation has to consider fan/LPC module. Total accumulatedShort-Haul time similar to the -3 for similar shop visit Long-Haul probable intervals to the third shop visit. Medium-Haul on-wing at this stage will be 17,000workscopes, perhaps slightly lower,” says This is because LLPs replaced at the first < 3FH 3 − 6FH > 6FH 20,000EFC, and so there would be up to Beale. “Material costs for a -7B are shop visit will be replaced at the third 13,000EFC remaining until LLPs in the expected to be 20-35% more than a -3 shop visit. Their cost should thus be fan/LPC needed replacing. The fan/LPC and the -7B’s cost of sub-contracted amortised over the combined second and module could thus be worked on at the repairs will be 5-15% more than those third removal intervals. Although some third shop visit. experienced by the -3.” modules have LLPs replaced together Sekinger estimates a core during the first or second shop visit, they refurbishment plus some work on the may then get LLPs replaced for a second LPT will use 2,700 man-hours (MH). time at different shop visits. LLPs for the Engine management Charged at a labour rate of $70 per MH fan/LPC have a list price of $305,000, iv These approximate on-wing intervals this will take total cost to about LLPs in the HP system a list price of and LLP lives strongly influence engine $140,000. Cost of materials and parts $785,000 and LLPs in the LPT a list price management and shop visit workscopes. will be about $700,000-800,000, on the of $426,000. Total time to the second shop visit will be

B.3 Core Database

v

B.3 Core Database
Specifications
T_TO [lbf] Weight EFH: [lb] TWR EFC 4276 4276 4301 4301 4995 4975 5250 5250 5250 5250 5216 5216 5216 5216 5216 5216 1670 2470 2470 3700 3700 3700 5230 5139 5139 5139 5139 9389 9389 9360 9389 9360 14545 14545 9213 9670 9499 9850 9213 9213 9213 9213 12400 15584 16500 7185 7185 11162 11162 11162 15596 18260 18260 12400 12400 12400 14545 15584 7264 10550 10550 10550 13100 13186 8905 8850 9295 9295 9135 9135 8731 8768 8731 9213 9213 9213 9213 9360 9360 9499 9850 4,33 4,68 5,12 5,46 5,01 4,72 6,10 4,19 4,48 5,14 3,55 3,95 4,22 4,60 5,06 1,40 1,40 1,40 1,40 1,20 1,20 1,50 1,80 1,80 1,80 1,80 1,80 1,80 1,80 1,80 MIF 1,10 1,10 1,10 1,10 1,09 1,09 1,09 1,09 1,09 1,09 1,18 1,18 1,18 1,18 1,18 removal Interval EFC 18000 16000 10000 7500

First Removal
Removal Interval EFH 25200 22400 14000 10500 LLP Reserves [$/EFC] 88,00 97,90 80,30 93,50 SV Reserves [$EFH] 53,90 60,50 68,20 90,20 removal Interval EFC 10000 8000 6500 5000 8000 8000 5000 10000 10000 9000 13000 13000 13000 12000 11000 8000 8000 5859 5078 7812 7031 4688 9500 9000 7750 6000 5750 5000 4500 4000 3500 5000 7500 6800 3300 2500 2400 2200 4250 1900 2100 2100 2150 2000 2000 5167 4667 3400 2167 1812 2417 2100 1850 2333 3500 2100 2250 2125 6000 4000 2667 2500 2375 2375 1857 1350 1600 1150 1500 1250 1500 1500 2500 3300 1850 1700 1750 5000 2500 1700 1500

Mature Removal
removal Interval EFH 14000 11200 9100 7000 9600 9600 7500 18000 18000 16200 23400 23400 23400 21600 19800 14400 9280 7500 6500 9999 9000 6001 18050 17100 14725 11400 10925 5000 9000 12000 14000 15000 11250 10200 4950 15000 16800 15400 12750 15200 14700 14700 15050 14000 14000 15501 14001 10200 13002 14496 14502 16800 18500 13998 10500 16800 18000 17000 18000 12000 16002 20000 19000 19000 6500 9450 8000 9200 9000 10000 7500 9000 5000 9900 12025 11900 14000 5000 7500 12750 10500 LLP Reserves [$/EFC] 83,05 72,60 80,30 84,70 100,28 100,28 119,90 94,83 94,83 94,83 86,14 86,14 86,14 93,22 107,38 93,22 72,60 70,62 70,62 64,20 69,55 73,83 112,11 112,11 136,35 121,20 121,20 198,00 220,00 209,00 222,20 198,00 514,00 514,00 242,55 253,00 209,00 213,40 157,50 197,40 252,00 252,00 418,00 661,00 661,00 200,00 200,00 370,00 343,00 343,00 700,00 807,00 807,00 375,00 400,00 375,00 389,00 556,00 185,00 330,00 330,00 330,00 429,00 698,00 144,48 144,48 144,48 199,95 201,24 216,72 185,76 135,45 180,60 189,63 243,81 261,87 175,44 258,00 220,59 223,17 216,72 SV Reserves [$EFH] 96,25 119,90 130,90 141,90 178,76 178,76 171,13 109,00 109,00 109,00 101,48 101,48 101,48 90,86 105,02 142,78 103,40 142,31 164,78 139,10 148,73 169,06 136,35 143,42 164,63 168,67 175,74 550,00 278,30 199,10 174,90 176,00 441,00 410,00 420,00 163,90 146,30 168,30 159,60 138,60 139,65 139,65 247,00 366,00 366,00 181,00 200,00 284,00 235,00 217,00 297,00 278,00 240,00 243,00 292,00 233,00 244,00 279,00 190,00 367,00 275,00 220,00 255,00 263,00 366,36 237,36 335,40 245,10 279,93 251,55 258,00 236,07 451,50 238,65 180,60 180,60 161,25 490,20 309,60 168,99 196,08

Normalized Data
1st Interval SVR Adj 32760 29120 18200 13650 1st cost Adj 37,69 42,31 47,69 63,08 mature mature interval cost Mean SVR adj Adj LLP Cost 18200 14560 11830 9100 14016 14016 9150 18000 18000 16200 23400 23400 23400 21600 19800 14400 13920 10424 9035 13899 12510 8341 18050 17100 14725 11400 10925 8125 8820 9624 9884 12030 13714 12434 6034 15000 15540 14245 17850 13376 13598 13598 13921 12950 12950 20151 18201 14280 13002 12756 14502 14784 15540 13998 14700 14784 15840 14960 25200 16800 16002 17600 16720 16720 74,04 92,23 100,69 109,15 122,44 122,44 140,27 109,00 109,00 109,00 101,48 101,48 101,48 90,86 105,02 142,78 68,93 102,38 118,55 100,07 107,00 121,63 136,35 143,42 164,63 168,67 175,74 338,46 283,98 248,25 247,73 219,45 361,77 336,34 344,54 163,90 158,16 181,95 114,00 157,50 150,97 150,97 267,03 395,68 395,68 139,23 153,85 202,86 235,00 246,59 297,00 315,91 285,71 243,00 208,57 264,77 277,27 317,05 135,71 262,14 275,00 250,00 289,77 298,86 85,53 85,25 80,30 89,10 100,28 100,28 119,90 104,10 104,10 104,10 89,09 89,09 89,09 93,22 107,38 93,22 61,33 70,62 70,62 64,20 69,55 73,83 112,11 112,11 136,35 121,20 121,20 198,00 220,00 209,00 222,20 132,00 342,67 342,67 242,55 253,00 209,00 213,40 157,50 197,40 252,00 252,00 278,67 440,67 440,67 133,33 133,33 246,67 228,67 228,67 466,67 538,00 538,00 250,00 266,67 250,00 259,33 370,67 185,00 220,00 220,00 220,00 286,00 465,33 144,48 144,48 144,48 199,95 201,24 216,72 185,76 135,45 180,60 189,63 243,81 261,87 175,44 258,00 220,59 223,17 216,72

OEM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM CFM GE GE GE GE GE GE IAE IAE IAE IAE IAE GE GE GE GE GE PW PW PW GE GE GE PW PW PW PW PW PW PW PW PW GE GE GE GE GE GE PW PW PW PW PW RR RR RR RR RR RR PW PW PW PW PW PW GE GE GE PW PW PW PW GE GE GE GE

Model

SF 1,30 1,30 1,30 1,30 1,46 1,46 1,22 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,50 1,39 1,39 1,39 1,39 1,39 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,63 0,98 0,80 0,71 0,80 1,22 1,22 1,22 1,00 0,93 0,93 1,40 0,88 0,93 0,93 0,93 0,93 0,93 1,30 1,30 1,40 1,00 0,88 1,00 0,88 0,84 1,00 1,40 0,88 0,88 0,88 1,40 1,40 1,00 0,88 0,88 0,88

CFM56-3-xxx 18500 CFM56-3B1 20000 CFM56-3B2 22000 CFM56-3C1 23500 CFM56-5A1 25000 CFM56-5A5 23500 CFM56-5B3 32000 CFM56-5B5 22000 CFM56-5B6 23500 CFM56-5B7 27000 CFM56-7B18 18500 CFM56-7B20 CFM56-7B22 CFM56-7B24 CFM56-7B26 CFM56-7B27 CF34-3B1 CF34-8E5 CF34-8E5A1 CF34-10E5 CF34-10E6 CF34-10E7 V2522-A5 V2524-A5 V2527-A5 V2530-A5 V2533-A5 CF6-80C2A5 CF6-80C2A5 CF6-80C2A3 CF6-80C2A5 CF6-80C2A2 PW4074 PW4077 PW4158 CF6-80C2B6 CF6-80C2B1F CF6-80C2D1F PW4052 PW4056 PW4060 PW4062 PW4168 PW4090 PW4098 PW2037 PW2040 CF6-80E1A2 CF6-80E1A2 CF6-80E1A2 GE90-85B GE90-110B GE90-110B PW4168 PW4168 PW4168 PW4077 PW4090 RB.211-535E4 Trent 772-60 Trent 772-60 Trent 772-60 Trent 884-17 Trent 895-17 JT9D-7R4E JT9D-7J JT9D-7Q JT9D-7Q JT9D-7R4G2 JT9D-7R4G2 CF6-50C2 CF6-50E2 CF6-50C2 PW4158 PW4060 PW4062 PW4056 CF6-80C2A2 CF6-80C2A3 CF6-80C2B1F CF6-80C2D1F 20600 22000 24000 26400 27300 9220 13800 15000 18285 19000 20300 22000 24000 27000 30000 33000 61300 61300 60200 61300 53500 77440 79960 58000 60800 58090 61960 52200 56750 60000 62000 68600 91790 99040 36600 40100 67500 67500 67500 84700 110000 110000 68600 68600 68600 79960 91790 40100 71100 71100 71100 86910 95000 50000 50000 53000 53000 54750 54750 52500 52500 52500 58000 60000 62000 56750 53500 60200 58090 61960

7000 15000 15000 14000 18000 17500 17000 16000 13000 10000 15000 8984 7422 14062 13281 10156 11500 11000 8750 7400 7000

10500 27000 27000 25200 32400 31500 30600 28800 23400 18000 17400 11500 9500 17999 17000 13000 21850 20900 16625 14060 13300

119,90 113,36 113,36 113,36 92,04 92,04 92,04 93,22 107,38 93,22 50,05 70,62 70,62 64,20 69,55 73,83 112,11 112,11 136,35 121,20 121,20

95,92 80,66 80,66 80,66 71,98 71,98 71,98 75,52 75,52 90,86 51,70 65,27 79,18 50,29 53,50 57,78 67,67 70,70 94,94 104,03 109,08

12810 27000 27000 25200 32400 31500 30600 28800 23400 18000 26100 15984 13205 25019 23630 18070 21850 20900 16625 14060 13300

72,13 74,00 74,00 74,00 61,00 61,00 61,00 64,00 64,00 77,00 31,33 43,88 53,24 33,81 35,97 38,85 67,00 70,00 94,00 103,00 108,00

5,23 1,80 1,18 5,52 1,16 1,10 5,59 1,28 1,07 6,07 1,28 1,07 4,94 1,28 1,07 5,14 1,28 1,07 5,49 1,28 1,07 4,21 1,90 1,01 4,67 1,90 1,01 5,25 1,90 1,01 5,84 1,90 1,01 6,42 1,90 1,01 6,53 1,00 1,10 6,53 2,00 1,10 6,43 3,00 1,10 6,53 4,00 1,10 5,72 3,00 1,10 5,32 1,50 1,00 5,50 1,50 1,00 6,30 1,50 1,05 6,29 6,00 1,10 6,12 7,00 1,10 6,29 7,00 1,10 5,67 3,00 1,05 6,16 8,00 1,05 6,51 7,00 1,05 6,73 7,00 1,05 5,53 7,00 1,00 5,89 7,00 1,00 6,00 7,00 1,00 5,09 3,00 1,00 5,58 3,00 1,00 6,05 3,00 1,00 6,05 6,00 1,00 6,05 8,00 1,00 5,43 6,00 1,00 6,02 8,00 1,00 6,02 10,00 1,00 5,53 6,00 1,00 5,53 3,00 1,00 5,53 8,00 1,00 5,50 8,00 1,00 5,89 8,00 1,00 5,52 3,00 1,00 6,74 3,00 1,00 6,74 6,00 1,00 6,74 8,00 1,00 6,63 8,00 1,00 7,20 8,00 1,00 5,61 3,50 1,29 5,65 7,00 1,29 5,70 5,00 1,29 5,70 8,00 1,29 5,99 6,00 1,29 5,99 8,00 1,29 6,01 5,00 1,29 5,99 6,00 1,29 6,01 2,00 1,29 6,30 3,00 1,29 6,51 6,50 1,29 6,73 6,16 5,72 6,43 6,12 6,29 7,00 8,00 1,00 3,00 7,50 7,00 1,29 1,29 1,29 1,29 1,29 1,29

6000 10000 9333

18000 15000 14000

198,00 514,00 514,00

135,30 267,00 286,00

14436 18285 17065

153,37 219,03 234,62

2857 2643 2643 6667 6667 4500 2833 2250 3000 2450 2150 3000 4500 2750 2750 2500 5333 4000 3750 3000 3000

19999 18501 18501 20001 20001 13500 16998 18000 18000 19600 21500 18000 13500 22000 22000 20000 15999 24000 30000 24000 24000

418,00 661,00 661,00 200,00 200,00 370,00 343,00 343,00 700,00 807,00 807,00 375,00 400,00 375,00 389,00 556,00 330,00 330,00 330,00 429,00 698,00

135,00 243,00 243,00 100,00 110,00 170,00 147,00 172,00 211,00 215,00 200,00 140,00 178,00 123,00 173,00 200,00 250,00 215,00 191,00 196,00 200,00

18499 17113 17113 26001 26001 18900 16998 15840 18000 17248 18060 18000 18900 19360 19360 17600 22399 24000 26400 21120 21120

145,95 262,70 262,70 76,92 84,62 121,43 147,00 195,45 211,00 244,32 238,10 140,00 127,14 139,77 196,59 227,27 178,57 215,00 217,05 222,73 227,27

Short-Haul Medium-Long-Haul

Three-Spool Old and Newly marketed Engines

Vortrag > Autor > Dokumentname > Datum

C Regression Analysis
SE_Data- Fit Least Squares

Response 1st Interval C.1 First Interval SH Engines adj Whole Model Actual by Predicted Plot
35000 30000 1st Interval adj Actual 25000 20000 15000 10000 20000 25000 30000

1st Interval adj Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0,77 RMSE=3247,8

Summary of Fit
RSquare RSquare Adj Root Mean Square Error Mean of Response Observations (or Sum Wgts) 0,769685 0,740895 3247,839 22162,07 28

Analysis of Variance
Source Model Error C. Total Sum of DF Squares Mean Square 3 846039131 282013044 24 253162938 10548456 27 1099202069 F Ratio 26,7350 Prob > F <,0001*

Parameter Estimates
Term Intercept TWR weight (weight-5407)*(weight-5407) Estimate 68466,325 -8267,819 -1,004437 0,0001212 Std Error 5575,065 942,4547 0,435151 5,961e-5 t Ratio 12,28 -8,77 -2,31 2,03 Prob>|t| <,0001* <,0001* 0,0299* 0,0531

Effect Tests
Prediction Function Source
Sum of Nparm DF Squares F Ratio Prob > F TWR 1 1 811801410 76,9593 <,0001* Interval f irst,SH = 68466.325284 − 8267.81904 · T W R − 1.00444 · weight weight 1 1 56202317 5,3280 0,0299* − 5407) ·0,0531 0.00012125] weight*weight + (weight − 5407) · [(weight4,1379 1 1 43648191

Residual by Predicted Plot
6000 4000 st Interval j Residual 2000 0 -2000

vi

C.2 Mature Interval SH Engines
SE_Data- Fit Least Squares

vii

Response mature Interval adj C.2 Mature Interval SH Engines Whole Model Actual by Predicted Plot
25000 mature Interval adj Actual 20000 15000 10000 5000 5000 mature Interval adj Leverage Residuals 10000 15000 20000 25000

TWR Leverage Plot
25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 3,5

4,0 4,5

5,

mature Interval adj Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0,79 RMSE=2112,5

TWR Leve

Summary of Fit
RSquare RSquare Adj Root Mean Square Error Mean of Response Observations (or Sum Wgts) 0,790264 0,783909 2112,513 14305,73 35

Analysis of Variance
Source Model Error C. Total DF 1 33 34 Sum of Squares Mean Square 554897670 554897670 147269489 4462711,8 702167159 F Ratio 124,3409 Prob > F <,0001*

Lack Of Fit
Source Lack Of Fit Pure Error Total Error DF 31 2 33 Sum of Squares Mean Square 146461838 4724575 807651 403825 147269489 F Ratio 11,6996 Prob > F 0,0817 Max RSq 0,9988

Parameter Estimates
Term Intercept TWR Estimate 40684,376 -5022,812 Std Error 2392,421 450,443 t Ratio 17,01 -11,15 Prob>|t| <,0001* <,0001*

Effect Tests
Prediction Function Source
Nparm DF TWR 1 Interval mature,SH 1 = 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 -1000 -2000 -3000 -4000 -5000 5000 Sum of Squares F Ratio Prob > F 554897670 − 5022.8116 · T W 40684.37633 124,3409 <,0001* R

Residual by Predicted Plot

mature Interval adj Residual

10000

15000

20000 25000

mature Interval adj Predicted

C.3 First Interval MLH Engines
BE_Data_wo_3s- Fit Least Squares

viii

Response 1st Engines C.3 First Interval MLH interval adj Whole Model Actual by Predicted Plot
28000 26000 1st interval adj Actual 24000 22000 20000 18000 16000 14000 14000 18000 22000 26000

1st interval adj Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0,91 RMSE=969,3

Summary of Fit
RSquare RSquare Adj Root Mean Square Error Mean of Response Observations (or Sum Wgts) 0,911592 0,88949 969,2997 18937,16 16

Analysis of Variance
Source Model Error C. Total DF 3 12 15 Sum of Squares Mean Square 116253879 38751293 11274503 939541,89 127528381 F Ratio 41,2449 Prob > F <,0001*

Lack Of Fit
Source Lack Of Fit Pure Error Total Error DF 5 7 12 Sum of Squares Mean Square 5046845 1009369 6227658 889665 11274503 F Ratio 1,1345 Prob > F 0,4233 Max RSq 0,9512

Parameter Estimates
Term Intercept thrust weight (thrust-76305)*(thrust-76305) Estimate 22539,976 -0,314694 1,4329074 3,4421e-6 Std Error 1210,754 0,078371 0,496822 4,789e-7 t Ratio 18,62 -4,02 2,88 7,19 Prob>|t| <,0001* 0,0017* 0,0137* <,0001*

Effect Tests
Prediction Function Source
Sum of Nparm DF Squares F Ratio Prob > F 0,0017* thrustirst,M LH = 22539.9757 + 1.4329 · weight − 0.3147 · thrust 1 1 15149153 16,1240 Interval f weight 1 1 7815403 8,3183 0,0137* +1 (thrust − 48533396[(thrust − 76305) · 0.0000034421] 76305) · 51,6564 <,0001* thrust*thrust 1

Residual by Predicted Plot

C.4 Mature Interval MLH Engines
BE_Data_wo_3s- Fit Least Squares

ix

Response MLH Engines C.4 Mature Interval3rd interval adj Whole Model Actual by Predicted Plot
21000 20000 19000 18000 17000 16000 15000 14000 13000 12000 12000

3rd interval adj Actual

15000 17000 19000

3rd interval adj Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0,80 RMSE=880,27

Summary of Fit
RSquare RSquare Adj Root Mean Square Error Mean of Response Observations (or Sum Wgts) 0,798364 0,766527 880,272 14805,49 23

Analysis of Variance
Source Model Error C. Total DF 3 19 22 Sum of Squares Mean Square 58293477 19431159 14722696 774878,73 73016173 F Ratio 25,0764 Prob > F <,0001*

Lack Of Fit
Source Lack Of Fit Pure Error Total Error DF 12 7 19 Sum of Squares Mean Square 10460068 871672 4262628 608947 14722696 F Ratio 1,4314 Prob > F 0,3263 Max RSq 0,9416

Parameter Estimates
Term Intercept TWR weight (weight-12072)*(weight-12072) Estimate 34415,709 -2759,253 -0,366246 0,0001018 Std Error 3013,422 485,7675 0,06245 1,816e-5 t Ratio 11,42 -5,68 -5,86 5,61 Prob>|t| <,0001* <,0001* <,0001* <,0001*

Effect Tests
Prediction Function Source
Sum of Nparm DF Squares F Ratio Prob > F TWR 1 1 25001151 32,2646 R<,0001* Interval mature,M LH = 34415.70939 − 2759.25322 · T W − 0.36625 · weight weight 1 1 26650979 34,3937 <,0001* +1 (weight −24347698 [(weight − 12072) · 0.000101795] 12072) · 31,4213 <,0001* weight*weight 1

Residual by Predicted Plot

C.5 First Shop Visit Restoration Costs
Base_Data- Fit Least Squares

x

C.5 First ShopResponse 1st cost adj Visit Restoration Costs
Whole Model Actual by Predicted Plot
250 1st cost adj Actual 200 150 100 50 50 100 150 200 250

thrust Leverage Plot
1st cost adj Leverage Residuals 250 200 150 100 50 0 20000

5000

1st cost adj Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0,93 RMSE=20,538

thrust Leve

Summary of Fit
RSquare RSquare Adj Root Mean Square Error Mean of Response Observations (or Sum Wgts) 0,925128 0,923535 20,53848 122,1495 49

Analysis of Variance
Source Model Error C. Total DF 1 47 48 Sum of Squares Mean Square 244971,87 244972 19825,98 422 264797,85 F Ratio 580,7369 Prob > F <,0001*

Lack Of Fit
Source Lack Of Fit Pure Error Total Error DF 30 17 47 Sum of Squares Mean Square 14101,817 470,061 5724,161 336,715 19825,979 F Ratio 1,3960 Prob > F 0,2371 Max RSq 0,9784

Parameter Estimates
Term Intercept thrust Estimate 7,1451068 0,0023619 Std Error 5,602079 0,000098 t Ratio 1,28 24,10 Prob>|t| 0,2084 <,0001*

Effect Tests
Prediction Function Source Nparm DF Squares F Ratio Prob > F thrust 1 1 244971,87 580,7369 <,0001* RCostf irst = 7.14511 + 0.002361887 · thrust Residual by Predicted Plot
50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 50 100 150 200 250 1st cost adj Predicted Sum of

1st cost adj Residual

C.6 Mature Shop Visit Restoration Costs
Base_Data- Fit Least Squares 2

xi

Response Restoration Costs C.6 Mature Shop Visit mature cost adj Whole Model Actual by Predicted Plot
400 mature cost adj Leverage Residuals 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 mature cost adj Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0,81 RMSE=38,591 350 mature cost adj Actual 300 250 200 150 100 50

thrust Leverage Plot
400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 20000

50000

thrust Levera

Summary of Fit
RSquare RSquare Adj Root Mean Square Error Mean of Response Observations (or Sum Wgts) 0,807809 0,804709 38,59068 190,3113 64

Analysis of Variance
Source Model Error C. Total DF 1 62 63 Sum of Squares Mean Square 388089,29 388089 92332,90 1489 480422,19 F Ratio 260,5955 Prob > F <,0001*

Lack Of Fit
Source Lack Of Fit Pure Error Total Error DF 41 21 62 Sum of Squares Mean Square 78144,940 1905,97 14187,961 675,62 92332,901 F Ratio 2,8211 Prob > F 0,0065* Max RSq 0,9705

Parameter Estimates
Term Intercept thrust Estimate 46,528678 0,0028861 Std Error 10,12921 0,000179 t Ratio 4,59 16,14 Prob>|t| <,0001* <,0001*

Effect Tests
Prediction Function Source
Sum of Nparm DF Squares F Ratio Prob > F thrust 1 1 388089,29 260,5955 <,0001* RCostmature = 46.52868 + 0.002886118 · thrust

Residual by Predicted Plot
100 mature cost adj Residual 50 0 -50 -100 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 mature cost adj Predicted

C.7 LLP Cost
LLP- Fit Least Squares

xii

C.7 LLPResponse LLP Reserves Cost
Whole Model Actual by Predicted Plot
900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 100 300 500 700 900 LLP Reserves Predicted P<.0001 RSq=0,95 RMSE=44,13

Summary of Fit
RSquare RSquare Adj Root Mean Square Error Mean of Response Observations (or Sum Wgts) 0,952884 0,950528 44,13013 254,4868 64

Analysis of Variance
Source Model Error C. Total DF 3 60 63 Sum of Squares Mean Square 2363135,5 787712 116848,1 1947 2479983,6 F Ratio 404,4799 Prob > F <,0001*

Lack Of Fit
Source Lack Of Fit Pure Error Total Error DF 48 12 60 Sum of Squares Mean Square 101360,93 2111,69 15487,16 1290,60 116848,09 F Ratio 1,6362 Prob > F 0,1780 Max RSq 0,9938

Parameter Estimates
Term Intercept weight thrust (weight-8608,78)*(weight-8608,78) Estimate -115,3133 0,0194512 0,0031206 2,6924e-6 Std Error 13,6202 0,007095 0,001069 3,188e-7 t Ratio -8,47 2,74 2,92 8,44 Prob>|t| <,0001* 0,0080* 0,0049* <,0001*

Effect Tests
Prediction Function Source
Sum of Nparm DF Squares F Ratio Prob > F weight 1 1 14635,69 0,0080* LLP Cost = − 115.31326 + 0.0194512 · weight 7,5152 + 0.0031206 · thrust thrust 1 1 16609,48 8,5288 0,0049* + (weight − 8608.78125) · ((weight − 8608.78125) · 2.69234 · 10−6 ) weight*weight 1 1 138881,53 71,3139 <,0001*

Residual by Predicted Plot

LLP Reserves Actual

D Model Parameters
D.1 Averaged Short-Haul-Engine Severity Curve
Averaged SH-Engine Severity Curve
3

2.5

Derate: 0% Severity Factor
2

Derate: 5% Derate: 10% Derate: 15% Derate: 20%

1.5

1

0.5

0 0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

Cycle Time [h]

Flight Time [h] 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.9 2.5 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

0% 2.800 2.100 1.600 1.240 1.000 0.920 0.826 0.770 0.740

5% 2.600 1.925 1.450 1.120 0.910 0.840 0.766 0.715 0.685

10% 2.400 1.750 1.300 1.000 0.860 0.780 0.706 0.660 0.630

15% 2.280 1.645 1.210 0.940 0.792 0.738 0.670 0.627 0.597

20% 2.160 1.540 1.120 0.880 0.744 0.696 0.634 0.594 0.564

xiii

D.2 Averaged Medium-Long-Haul-Engine Severity Curve

xiv

D.2 Averaged Medium-Long-Haul-Engine Severity Curve
Averaged MLH-Engine Severity Curve
3

2.5

Derate: 0% Severity Factor
2

Derate: 5% Derate: 10% Derate: 15% Derate: 20%

1.5

1

0.5

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Cycle Time [h]

Flight Time [h] 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0

0% 2.800 2.000 1.600 1.405 1.260 1.140 1.045 0.990 0.970 0.940 0.920 0.890

5% 2.500 1.850 1.500 1.315 1.180 1.070 0.985 0.935 0.915 0.890 0.870 0.845

10% 2.200 1.700 1.400 1.225 1.100 1.000 0.925 0.880 0.860 0.840 0.820 0.800

15% 2.020 1.610 1.340 1.171 1.052 0.958 0.889 0.847 0.827 0.810 0.790 0.773

20% 1.900 1.520 1.280 1.117 1.004 0.916 0.853 0.814 0.794 0.780 0.760 0.746

D.3 Time & Material Factor Curves

xv

D.3 Time & Material Factor Curves
SH Time&Material Factor Curve
1.15 1.1 1.05

T&M Factor

1 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6

Cycle Time [h]
EFH:EFC T&M Factor 0.5 0.90 1.0 0.95 1.5 0.98 1.9 1.00 2.5 1.02 3.0 1.03 4.0 1.04 5.0 1.05 6.0 1.06

MLH Time&Material Factor Curve
1.15 1.1 1.05

T&M Factor

1 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Cycle Time [h]
EFH:EFC T&M Factor 1.0 0.85 2.0 0.91 3.0 0.94 4.0 0.96 5.0 0.98 6.0 1.00 7.0 1.03 8.0 1.05 9.0 1.07 10.0 1.09 11.0 1.10 12.0 1.11

E Model Analysis
Sensitivity Analysis for MLH engines
x 10
4

Thrust - Interval Sensitivity
2.1

2 1.9 1.8

x 10

4

Weight - Interval Sensitivity
First-Run Mature-Run

First-Run Mature-Run
2 1.9

Interval [EFH]

1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 7.4

Interval [EFH]

1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4

EFH:EFC = 6[h] Derate = 10% Weight = 14545[lbs]
7.6 7.8 8 8.2 8.4 8.6 x 10
4

1.3 1.2 1.2

EFH:EFC = 6[h] Derate = 10% Thrust = 78000[lbf ]
1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 x 10
4

Thrust [lbf ]

Weight [lbs]

2.4

x 10

4

EFH:EFC - Interval Sensitivity
2.1

x 10

4

Derate - Interval Sensitivity
First-Run Mature-Run

First-Run
2.2

Mature-Run

2 1.9

2

Interval [EFH]

Interval [EFH]

1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

Derate = 10% Thrust = 78000[lbf ] Weight = 14545[lbs]
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1.4 1.3 0 5 10

EFH:EFC = 6[h] Thrust = 78000[lbf ] Weight = 14545[lbs]
15 20

1

EFH:EFC [h]

Derate [%]

xvi

E Model Analysis

xvii

Thrust - SVC per EFH — Sensitivity
380 380

Weight - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
First-Run
360

First-Run Mature-Run

Mature-Run

SVC per EFH [$/EFH]

SVC per EFH [$/EFH]

360

340

340

320

320

300

300

280

280

260 7.4 7.6 7.8 8

EFH:EFC = 6[h] Derate = 10% Weight = 14545[lbs]
8.2 8.4 8.6 x 10
4

260

EFH:EFC = 6[h] Derate = 10% Thrust = 78000[lbf ]
1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55 1.6 x 10
4

240 1.2

Thrust [lbf ]

Weight [lbs]

EFH:EFC - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
550 400

Derate - SVC per EFH Sensitivity
First-Run Mature-Run SVC per EFH [$/EFH]

First-Run
500

Mature-Run

SVC per EFH [$/EFH]

450 400 350 300 250 200

350

300

Derate = 10% Thrust = 78000[lbf ] Weight = 14545[lbs]
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

EFH:EFC = 6[h] Thrust = 78000[lbf ] 250 Weight = 14545[lbs]
0 5 10 15 20

EFH:EFC [h]

Derate [%]

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful